Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2008/06

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2004									09	10	11	12
2005	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12
2006	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2007	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12
2008	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12
2009	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12

——————————————— Archive June 2008 ———————————————

1 June 1
- 1.1 Image:200px-Apocalyptica-I_Don't_Care.jpg
- 1.2 Image:Telegraphstamp.jpg
- 1.3 Image:Postage Stamp.jpg
- 1.4 Image:Ahmed Khadr in 1985 Pakistan.jpg
- 1.5 Image:Zinfandel_grapes.jpg
- 1.6 Image:Newphy.jpg
- 1.7 Image:Olta Boka.jpg
- 1.8 Image:Umraojaan 4.jpg
- 1.9 Image:Granier.jpg
- 1.10 Image:WW2 - Baltic full-scale offensive, 1944 (general).jpg
- 1.11 Image:Tomba di Roberto il Guiscardo.jpg
- 1.12 Image:Angelica_garzon_sanchez.JPG
- 1.13 Image:08AshleyMedal.jpg
- 1.14 Image:CCF15032008_00000.jpg
- 1.15 Image:CUHK.svg
- 1.16 Image:Ccshslogo.jpg
- 1.17 Image:A_Black_Cat01b700px.gif
- 1.18 Image:Editix_schema_editor.png
- 1.19 Image:Balagangadhara_video_still.jpg
- 1.20 Image:DSCF0082.JPG
- 1.21 Image:Ll.jpg
- 1.22 Image:DSCF0088.JPG
- 1.23 Image:FlandriaWsch..gif
- 1.24 Image:Zorro colorado.jpg
- 1.25 Image:Tol_1.jpg
- 1.26 Image:Våbenskjold-Ahlefeldt-Laurvig.jpg
- 1.27 Image:Queen_Elizabeth_II_inspects_the_garde_at_Expo67,_Montréal.jpg
- 1.28 Image:ROCKEROS_y_BORREGOS.pdf
- 1.29 Image:Klim Kamenko.pdf
- 1.30 Image:Sophia_iznutri.jpg
- 1.31 Image:Adolf Bertram.jpg
- 1.32 Image:Daniel_alcides.jpg
- 1.33 Image:4_MONTAGNE_STE_VICTOIRE_1.jpg
- 1.34 Image:Uecker by Wolleh.jpg
- 1.35 Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg
- 1.36 Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg
2 June 2
- 2.1 Image:Marcus_Tallberg2.JPG
- 2.2 Image:Requisitospw.png
- 2.3 Image:Alesana2_2.jpg
- 2.4 Image:BauchklangPhil.jpg
- 2.5 Image:Nick2_Assassin.PNG
- 2.6 Image:Hardiman.jpg
- 2.7 Image:RosieMalek-Yonan.jpg
- 2.8 Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif
- 2.9 Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif
- 2.10 Image:Vinometer.1.jpg
- 2.11 Image:Yves_Saint-Laurent.jpg
- 2.12 Image:Psicotomimetismo.JPG
- 2.13 Image:Scan0001.JPG
- 2.14 Image:Woman_clitoris.jpg
- 2.15 Image:Female_genitalia,_with_hand_(1654).jpg
- 2.16 Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg
- 2.17 Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg
- 2.18 Image:Tims_wife.jpg
- 2.19 Image:TESIS DOCTORAL.pdf
- 2.20 Image:Archivos Universitarios en el Perú.pdf
- 2.21 Image:ResumeBLANK-1-.pdf
- 2.22 Image:Frank Hecker.pdf
- 2.23 Image:Parque podocarpus.pdf
- 2.24 Image:M24asociados.pdf
- 2.25 Image:PARADOJAS HIDROSTÁTICAS.pdf
- 2.26 Image:Aiwass_foto1.JPG
- 2.27 Image:MusicIsOurWay.jpg
- 2.28 Image:Maradonahand3.jpg
- 2.29 Image:Lizas_Labiaplastie.jpg
- 2.30 Image:Gotta_stand_up.jpg
- 2.31 Image:HUT_students_in_ao_dai.jpg
- 2.32 Image:Fellatio-real.jpg
- 2.33 Image:Waterhouse_Echo_and_Narcissus.jpg
- 2.34 Image:Strudwick_-_A_Golden_Thread.jpg
- 2.35 Image:Lorrain_-_Ascagne_(1682).jpg
- 2.36 Image:Biografia_felinto.JPG
- 2.37 Image:Ecology_Ernst_Haeckel_1.svg
- 2.38 Image:Karpas&Co.pdf
- 2.39 Image:DEmo ESPANOL.pdf
- 2.40 Image:FBW Satzung.pdf
- 2.41 Image:FBW Namensaenderung.pdf
- 2.42 Image:FBW Gruendung.pdf
- 2.43 Image:Nationale AbmeldungFP.pdf
- 2.44 Image:FBW Aufloesungsbeschluss.pdf
- 2.45 Image:FBW Aufloesungsbeschluss.pdf
- 2.46 Image:Vittorio pernigucci.pdf
- 2.47 Image:HowTOsaveAdocument.pdf
- 2.48 Image:HowTOsaveAdocument1.pdf
- 2.49 Image:Sin_título4.jpg
- 2.50 Image:Sega 32x.jpeg
- 2.51 Image:Vivi and Torben.jpg
- 2.52 Image:2Ameripol.JPG
- 2.53 Image:JeremyDSilverman.jpg
- 2.54 Image:Thomas Friedli.gif
- 2.55 Image:Franco-Corelli-Trovatore.jpg
- 2.56 Image:Mot_so_kieu_ao_dai_le_hoi.JPG
- 2.57 Image:Wining.jpg
- 2.58 Image:Yannick_Jaulin.JPG
- 2.59 Image:Chaitoc.jpg
- 2.60 Image:Plataforma_logística_de_Elvas_caia.JPG
- 2.61 Image:Nancy-Periquita.jpg
- 2.62 Image:Belgrano.jpg
- 2.63 Image:Poglavnik.jpg
- 2.64 Image:Scarface_logo.jpg
- 2.65 Image:Porto-Rico-demography.png
- 2.66 Image:LogoIntroSpection.jpg
- 2.67 Image:Conference_day_1.JPG
- 2.68 Image:Karte Obed-Kultur.png
- 2.69 Image:Guntherpancke.jpg
- 2.70 Image:Batalla_de_ayohuma.jpg
- 2.71 Image:Tims_wife.jpg
- 2.72 Image:Streikbrökelmann.jpg
- 2.73 Image:MacBook_Air_1.jpg
- 2.74 Image:MacBook_Air_1.jpg
- 2.75 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 2.76 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 2.77 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 2.78 Image:Black_genitalia.jpg
- 2.79 Image:Black_genitalia.jpg
- 2.80 Image:Black_genitalia_2.jpg
- 2.81 Image:Black_genitalia_2.jpg
- 2.82 Images of Alexkhandria2k
- 2.83 Images of Alexkhandria2k
- 2.84 Image:Female_genitalia.JPG
- 2.85 Image:Female_genitalia.JPG
- 2.86 Image:AllisonCroweLittleLightalbumcover.jpg
- 2.87 Image:Huỳnh_Phú_Sổ.jpg
- 2.88 Image:Bazilika_Ostřihom.JPG
3 June 3
- 3.1 Image:GAL_Gallus_gallus_JMR.jpg
- 3.2 Image:Elgalloylagallina19.jpg
- 3.3 Image:Mack Trucks logo.svg
- 3.4 Category:Varaždin castle
- 3.5 Image:Einstein_patentoffice.jpg
- 3.6 Image:L_fe513400387c199b37ea2987dba2d6dd.jpg
- 3.7 Image:Res MAY 2006.pdf
- 3.8 Image:2006-2007VOW.pdf
- 3.9 Image:RADIO WORLD V O ARTICLE 970503.pdf
- 3.10 Image:La información Oficial.pdf
- 3.11 Image:COLLABORATION GRID f2006.pdf
- 3.12 Image:PSICOLOGIA AERONAUTICA 1.pdf
- 3.13 Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 2.pdf
- 3.14 Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 4.pdf
- 3.15 Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 3.pdf
- 3.16 Image:Buchrezension arndt demonen.pdf
- 3.17 Image:Juan Pablo Martínez.pdf
- 3.18 Image:Calidad del Hormigón.pdf
- 3.19 Image:Deflexión de vigas.pdf
- 3.20 Image:Franklin Franco Pichardo.pdf
- 3.21 Image:Paard-Informatie-Onderzoek.pdf
- 3.22 Image:Luke Thomas Biographical.pdf
- 3.23 Image:Gil vander Heyden.pdf
- 3.24 Image:Iñaki Larrimbe.pdf
- 3.25 Image:Biografía artística general.pdf
- 3.26 Image:Microsoft Word - CHUSCO.pdf
- 3.27 Image:Microsoft Word -PINCHADO.pdf
- 3.28 Image:Microsoft Word - GUAYABO.pdf
- 3.29 Image:Microsoft Word - ENVOLATADO.pdf
- 3.30 Image:PERFIL-AGUSTIN.06.pdf
- 3.31 Image:SOPEP Company Policy.pdf
- 3.32 Image:Press Release 1.pdf
- 3.33 Image:MyBloop_logo.png
- 3.34 Image:Final trabajo review.pdf
- 3.35 Image:Farmacia-morlan-solares.pdf
- 3.36 Image:Microsoft Word - Tanzima1.pdf
- 3.37 Image:Size Balanced Tree.pdf
- 3.38 Image:Artillery_871.jpg
- 3.39 Image:JoshKlinghoffer.jpg
- 3.40 Image:Joe_Clark_head.jpg
- 3.41 Image:ProclamadoresBrasil.jpg
- 3.42 Image:ACTJ_LSCH.jpg
- 3.43 Image:Cl_saison_image.png
- 3.44 Image:573px-Fred_and_Ginger_from_the_Front2.jpg
- 3.45 Image:John_cassavetes_3.jpg
- 3.46 Image:Akyou.JPG
- 3.47 Image:Baluchitherium.jpg
- 3.48 Image:NoETA.JPG
- 3.49 Image:ThéodoreDeck_Guebwiller.jpg
- 3.50 Image:Carapils.jpg
- 3.51 Image:Monnaie de Carthage.png
- 3.52 Image:IMG 5889.jpg
- 3.53 Image:Map_2007_Security_Council.png
- 3.54 Image:Warsaw_Uprising_-_Karl_Ammunition.jpg
- 3.55 Image:Foto 3230ß.gif
- 3.56 Image:Bee_Gees_logo.gif
- 3.57 Windows screenshots
  - 3.57.1 February 2008
  - 3.57.2 June 2008
- 3.58 Image:Tamcam.jpg
4 June 4
- 4.1 Image:Marcel_Proust.jpg
- 4.2 Image:Miley-cyrus060807.jpg
- 4.3 Image:North_America_satellite_orthographic.jpg
- 4.4 Image:Ángel Émbil Ecenarro.pdf
- 4.5 Image:Penis_0016.JPG
- 4.6 Image:JamieBamber.jpg
- 4.7 Image:Edward_James_Olmos_Sept_06_crop.jpg
- 4.8 Image:Budapeshta fera ponto.jpg
- 4.9 Image:HeilsbergKirche.jpg
- 4.10 Image:SchlossanlageHeilsberg.jpg
- 4.11 Image:HeilsbergEvKirche.jpg
- 4.12 Image:Beijing Office for Women's Production and Education.jpg
- 4.13 Image:Emms.jpg
- 4.14 Image:Golden_Retriever_Swedish_winter.jpg
- 4.15 Image:Gmilogo.gif
- 4.16 Image:Eva-vdm.jpg
- 4.17 Image:Plexus_Online_Logo.GIF
- 4.18 Image:Ava_Gardner.jpg
- 4.19 Image:USA_Iran.jpg
- 4.20 Image:Paspoort_NL.jpg
- 4.21 Image:F07.Domme.0014.JPG
- 4.22 Image:RBMK.Reactor.jpg
- 4.23 Image:Ortszentrum.jpg
- 4.24 Image:Parque_industrial.JPG
- 4.25 Image:BeechmontEntrance.JPG
- 4.26 Image:Gilda_Gray_2.jpg
- 4.27 Image:Ahmed_al-Khatib.jpg
- 4.28 Image:LightshipNantucket.jpg
- 4.29 Image:Norbert_Bude.jpg
- 4.30 Image:Luxor,_West_Bank,_home_of_Howard_Carter,_Egypt,_Oct_2004.jpg
- 4.31 Image:USS_New_York_City_(SSN-696).jpg
- 4.32 Image:Sky Jerusalem South-7BC-11-12.gif
- 4.33 Image:Encabezado_cuenca_J.jpg
- 4.34 Image:Festival_de_todas_las_ares_Víctor_Jara.JPG
- 4.35 Image:Stub.jpg
- 4.36 Image:Stub.jpg
- 4.37 WikiProject Canada
- 4.38 Images in Category:Murals in Ludington, Michigan
- 4.39 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 4.40 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 4.41 Image:Vagina.JPG
- 4.42 Image:Mason_Raymond.jpg
5 June 5
- 5.1 Image:SLCWestlandsSign.jpg
- 5.2 Image:Fourtf.jpg
- 5.3 Image:ULA.JPG
- 5.4 Image:Briancook.jpg
- 5.5 Image:Mauriceevans.jpg
- 5.6 Image:Logo_SOS_pechhulp.jpg
- 5.7 Image:Smetterl_2.JPG
- 5.8 Image:コカコーラロゴ7110009.jpg
- 5.9 Image:Hall.jpg
- 5.10 Image:Hall.jpg
- 5.11 Image:Miguel_Lopez.gif
- 5.12 Image:Voetnoten.png
- 5.13 Image:Goodsouls.jpg
- 5.14 Image:Fourtf2.jpg
- 5.15 Image:Bornagain.jpg
- 5.16 Image:Thistimestar.jpg
- 5.17 Image:Alcoholic.jpg
- 5.18 Image:Lullaby.jpg
- 5.19 Image:Poor_misguided.jpg
- 5.20 Image:Silenceeasy.jpg
- 5.21 Image:Megan.JPG
- 5.22 Image:Megan_follows.JPG
- 5.23 Image:Statue_of_Colonel_Thomas_Cass,_Commander_of_the_Ninth_Regiment_Massachusetts_Volunteers.JPG
- 5.24 Image:Articaine.png
- 5.25 Image:Salvador_Dali-Maldoror-1942.jpg
- 5.26 Image:LetrèshonorablePierreElliottTrudeau_.jpg
- 5.27 Image:L_0a113592a292d1e0008978627625eb2a.jpg
- 5.28 Image:Eiffeltowernightsouth.JPG
- 5.29 Image:LeftyStatue.jpg
- 5.30 Image:Weissmann_Wedekind1.jpg
- 5.31 Image:Scorpion_bowl_iran.jpg
- 5.32 Image:Conceicaodapraia028.jpg
- 5.33 Image:Martin_Škrtel_&_Rafa.jpg
- 5.34 Image:Waldsteinhaus_nach_Restauration.jpg
- 5.35 Image:Z-nocu002_2004.jpg
- 5.36 Image:Javier_Loppez.jpg
- 5.37 Image:Second Battle of Falkirk.jpg
- 5.38 Image:Luis_Echeverria_Alvarez.jpg
- 5.39 Image:Rivers.jpg
- 5.40 Image:Susan.jpg
- 5.41 Image:Susan.jpg
- 5.42 Image:Tillywb.jpg
6 June 6
- 6.1 Image:Gabriel Fahrenheit.jpg
- 6.2 Image:Alison_Lapper_Pregnant_-_Trafalgar_Square.jpg
- 6.3 Image:Miramontes_patent.jpg
- 6.4 Image:B-Factory Comite Directivo 2.pdf
- 6.5 Image:Logo Raruto.png
- 6.6 Image:Portada 3 Raruto.jpg
- 6.7 Image:Respiratory system complete en.svg
- 6.8 Image:Her_Majesty Queen Elizabeth II with Prime Minister The Rt. Hon. Pierre Elliott Trudeau signing the Constitution.jpg
- 6.9 Image:Chris_Kline_Contra_GDC07a.jpg
- 6.10 Image:Chris_Kline_Contra_GDC07b.jpg
- 6.11 Image:VGL2.jpg
- 6.12 Image:Chris_Kline_GANG1.jpg
- 6.13 Image:Lipovljani.PNG
- 6.14 Image:Givatayim_Observatory_Logo.jpg
- 6.15 Image:First_night_at_the_observatory.jpg
- 6.16 Image:IAA_Logo.JPG
- 6.17 Image:Benzyl.svg
- 6.18 Image:Ixus-p1010137.jpg
- 6.19 Image:The White Album.svg
- 6.20 Image:Cuzco_signing.jpg
- 6.21 Image:Galleria_dell'Accademia,_Lorenzo_Monaco,_Trionfo_della_Morte.JPG
- 6.22 Image:Fra_Bartolomeo,_Christ.JPG
- 6.23 Image:Santa_Trinita,_Giovanni_da_ponte,_martirio_di_san_bartolomeo_1(1434).JPG
- 6.24 Image:Diablo2.jpg
- 6.25 Image:Supermercadosperuanos.gif
- 6.26 Image:E2C_JASDF.jpg
- 6.27 Image:DoNotFeedTroll.svg
- 6.28 Image:Scarlett-johansson-1.jpg
- 6.29 Image:Zamek_Bierzgłowski_outsite_1.jpg
- 6.30 Image:Lennon_Ono_Trudeau_1969.jpg
- 6.31 Image:Collections_canada_PA-197391.jpg
- 6.32 Image:John_Turner_Liberal_Leadership_Convention_1984.jpg
- 6.33 Image:Turner_at_House_of_Commons_after_becoming_PM.jpg
- 6.34 Image:Turnerreturns.jpg
- 6.35 Image:Turneryoung.jpg
- 6.36 Image:Sauvé-cropped.jpg
- 6.37 Image:Measuring_fingerprints_w_compass_RCMP.jpg
- 6.38 Image:PierrePilote.jpg
- 6.39 Image:Jack_Lemmon_1967.jpg
- 6.40 Image:Gavel.jpg
- 6.41 Image:GMA Kelly-Clarkson.jpg
- 6.42 Image:Picnic_resort_in_Prabhadevi_area!to_be_converted_to_buildings..JPG
- 6.43 Image:Last_farmland_within_Mumbai_city_in_'Prabhadevi_area'.JPG
- 6.44 Image:Village_sceane,_'Lokhandwalla_furure_bldg_project..JPG
- 6.45 Image:Mariadanielatorrealba.jpg
- 6.46 Image:Williams_Planetarium.jpg
- 6.47 Image:Una_selva_de_ambiente_stereo.jpg
- 6.48 Image:Arill_Riise_TV_2_Landstinget.jpg
- 6.49 Image:Arill_Riise_Landstinget-_TV_2.jpg
- 6.50 Image:Cyrano.JPG
- 6.51 Image:Ernstroehm.jpg
- 6.52 Image:HPLC kolom.jpg
- 6.53 Image:Sharp_SX862_Internet.jpg
- 6.54 Image:Paul_Curreri.jpg
- 6.55 Image:LOGOASV.gif
- 6.56 Image:Ludwig thoma karl klimsch1909.jpg
- 6.57 Image:Cockfighting_in_Rolligon_Cockpit(Manila).jpg
- 6.58 Image:JosephJRoberts.jpg
- 6.59 Image:OSFT.jpg
- 6.60 Image:The Beatles album cover.jpg
- 6.61 Image:The Beatles album cover.jpg
- 6.62 Image:HK_Worldwide_House_The_Beverly_Hills_Central_Tram_Stop_1.JPG
- 6.63 Image:Tim_OBrien.jpg
- 6.64 Image:Reiter des Kavallerie-Regiments 18.jpg
- 6.65 Image:Flag_of_Menton_and_Roquebrune.gif
- 6.66 Image:Penis-Composite-CirumsisedandUncircumsised.jpg
- 6.67 Image:Freystschl.jpg
7 June 7
- 7.1 Image:Female_Students_Standing_Guard.jpg
- 7.2 Image:Listen_to_Music.jpg
- 7.3 Image:Shanghai_University_Students.jpg
- 7.4 Image:Business_Language.jpg
- 7.5 Image:Coverberkleemusic.jpg
- 7.6 Image:Farhad_Khoiee-Abbasi1.jpg
- 7.7 Image:Wasparksign.jpg
- 7.8 Image:Mancora_beach1.jpg
- 7.9 Image:Amanda_Seyfried.png
- 7.10 Image:YSL_First-Page.JPG
- 7.11 Image:Tony_Furtado.jpg
- 7.12 Image:EG_LIAN4_33.JPG
- 7.13 Image:Background_Info.hosmane.08.pdf
- 7.14 Image:Tom_cavalcante_ronaltom.jpg
- 7.15 Image:Carlos_gamarra2.jpg
- 7.16 Image:Teri-200.jpg
- 7.17 Image:Free_Software_Portal_Logo.svg
- 7.18 Image:Floss_draft.png
- 7.19 Image:Mail_DG_RI_bourseQuébec.pdf
- 7.20 Image:Softtek_logo.gif
- 7.21 Image:Ralph_Keller_1938.jpg
- 7.22 Image:Casa_da_Fazenda_Quissama_frente_01.jpg
- 7.23 Image:Esquema_de_Beowulf.jpg
- 7.24 Image:Ambassador_1950_advert.jpg
- 7.25 Image:IWASWorldWheelchairandAmputeeGames-Men's100M-T42.pdf
- 7.26 Image:IWASWorldWheelchairandAmputeeGames-Men's200M-T42.pdf
- 7.27 Image:Alex_K_Hiroshima_kensho.svg
- 7.28 Image:Alex_K_Nagasakiken_kensho.svg
- 7.29 Image:JollyRottenFlag.png
- 7.30 Image:Alex_K_Shigaken_kensho.svg
- 7.31 Image:Alex_K_Nagasaki_shisho.svg
- 7.32 Image:Alex_K_Yamaguchiken_kensho.svg
- 7.33 Image:Alex_K_Yamanashiken_kensho.svg
- 7.34 Image:Mg_0399_Romulo_Campos.jpg
- 7.35 Image:Acenaphthene-3D.jpg
- 7.36 Image:02082235b(227_x_247).jpg
- 7.37 Image:Huggle_error.PNG
- 7.38 Image:Harmony670.jpg
- 7.39 Image:2008_UEFA_Euro_Ticket_Back_side.JPG
- 7.40 Image:PretoMassa01.jpg
- 7.41 Image:KIS7pl.png
- 7.42 Image:Lumix-ls60.jpg
- 7.43 Image:Toonderselfportrait.jpg
- 7.44 Image:Iron_Man_Opening_Night!.jpg
- 7.45 Image:DeGaulle_cropped.jpg
- 7.46 Image:Chilax2.jpg
- 7.47 Image:Camino_de_col_yguazu.jpg
- 7.48 Image:2475544941 4b6d5594f9 o.jpg
- 7.49 Image:Jennifer_Lavoie_March_31_2007.jpg
- 7.50 Image:PC081001.jpg
- 7.51 Image:ODB_Mural.jpg
- 7.52 Image:Devon_Sproule.jpg
- 7.53 Image:ItalianAmericansportsHOF.jpg
- 7.54 Image:Brasil_de_Chapéu_de_Couro.jpg
- 7.55 Image:Skullfront.png
- 7.56 Image:CatherineDaza.jpg
- 7.57 Image:Lima_banner.PNG
- 7.58 Image:RatioClub.jpg
- 7.59 Template:PD-PEGov
- 7.60 Image:Multiple-sclerosis-005.jpg
- 7.61 Image:Necromouse.jpg
- 7.62 Image:Necromouse.jpg
- 7.63 Image:Necromouse.jpg
- 7.64 Image:Necromouse.jpg
- 7.65 Image:Necromouse.jpg
- 7.66 Images of Harrys51
- 7.67 Image:Saci.jpg
- 7.68 Image:Saci.jpg
- 7.69 Amanda Gilman photos
- 7.70 Image:Saint_tryphon_Myrtos.JPG
- 7.71 Image:Magallanes.Ost.png
- 7.72 Image:Navapolatsk3.jpg
- 7.73 Image:פרס_ישראל.jpg
8 June 8
- 8.1 Image:Mitterrand.jpg
- 8.2 Image:De_Gaulle.jpg
- 8.3 Image:Céline_Dion.jpg
- 8.4 Image:Barbara_(chanteuse).jpg
- 8.5 Image:Bachspach.jpg
- 8.6 Image:KH_Birth_by_Sleep.jpg
- 8.7 Image:Red_Deer_Transit_logo_on_a_bus.jpg
- 8.8 Image:1191361174_f.jpg
- 8.9 Image:Anti-Racism.png
- 8.10 Category:Maps of Texas State Highways
- 8.11 Image:PK_ORLEN_001.png
- 8.12 Image:Miniature_snowman_family.jpg
- 8.13 Image:Vevrier Chloe Adult Ent Expo 2006.jpg
- 8.14 Image:Chloe Vevrier.jpg
- 8.15 Image:Russian license palate (EN).png
- 8.16 Image:Atr1.jpg
- 8.17 Image:羅倫佐的油.jpg
- 8.18 Image:IE7_pro_Wiki.jpg
- 8.19 Image:Karta_FP_Tuamotu_isl.PNG
- 8.20 Image:Red River Trails Locater Map cropped.PNG
- 8.21 Image:Babylon_5_station_shadowgraph.jpg
- 8.22 Image:La_fee_electricite.jpg
- 8.23 Image:Sendero_promocion_informacion.jpg
- 8.24 Image:The cosmos flows out of the Tao.PNG
- 8.25 Image:GreatSeljuqEmpireFlag.svg
- 8.26 Image:Bactria_CAIS.gif
- 8.27 Image:Synagoga_Głogów_1.jpg
- 8.28 Image:Laos AIDS education campaign.jpg
- 8.29 Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg
- 8.30 Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg
- 8.31 Images by Think outside the box
- 8.32 Images of Bonjour Quebec
- 8.33 Image:FF_D-33_FNV_Almirante_Garcia_arv.jpg
- 8.34 Image:Fnr_color.jpg
- 8.35 Image:Treaty of VerdunCS.svg
- 8.36 Image:S-Bahn Leipzig-Halle.png
- 8.37 Image:Minsk_stena_Tsoi_2.JPG
- 8.38 Image:Paint.gif
- 8.39 Image:Lafayette_and_American_Coney_Islands.jpg
- 8.40 Images of Rcuya
- 8.41 Book scans
9 June 9
- 9.1 Image:StephenColeridge.jpg
- 9.2 Image:Maricopa-Harvester-Ant_.JPG
- 9.3 Image:Kinderen_in_formele_opvang.gif
- 9.4 Image:Aantal_geboorten_onder_tienermeisjes.gif
- 9.5 Image:Omotesando Hills 001.jpg
- 9.6 Image:Commons-logo-new.PNG
- 9.7 Image:MUÑECA NANCY.pdf
- 9.8 Image:Male sexual harrasment.jpg
- 9.9 Image:Br2.jpg
- 9.10 Image:Isella1.jpg
- 9.11 Image:DeBilt vorstperiode.png
- 9.12 Image:Coca_Cola_Drinker.png
- 9.13 Image:Garrysmod.png
- 9.14 Image:Vanessa Carlton 2 by David Shankbone.jpg
- 9.15 Image:Spongebob_Burger_King.jpg
- 9.16 Image:CapdOr.JPG
- 9.17 Image:Fedora_logo.svg
- 9.18 Image:Pikachu-temp.JPG
- 9.19 Image:Principal2.gif
- 9.20 Image:P6081773.JPG
- 9.21 Image:Reutte_Tirol.jpg
- 9.22 Image:Angela.jpg
- 9.23 Image:Toy mammoth.jpg
- 9.24 Image:Kidhugsspongebob.jpg
- 9.25 Image:Pic2_big.PNG
- 9.26 Image:Pic2_big.jpg
- 9.27 Image:Systemtheorie.Luhmann.pdf
- 9.28 Image:Twin_Towers_in_fire_-_911-_Fema_picture.jpg
- 9.29 Image:V000065901.jpg
- 9.30 Image:DEN-Copenhagen-Frederick IX of Denmark statue.JPG
- 9.31 Image:Male_genitalia.jpg
- 9.32 Image:Edward_VI_Scrots_c1550.jpg
- 9.33 Image:Auer (2).jpg
- 9.34 Image:HOI_1903_Volume_1_page_28.djvu
- 9.35 Image:Zhang_Heng.jpg
- 9.36 Image:Briancook.jpg
- 9.37 Image:IsraeliInitiativeHeb.jpg
- 9.38 Image:IsraeliInitiativeHeb.jpg
- 9.39 Image:S-21_Skull_Map.jpg
- 9.40 Image:S-21_Skull_Map.jpg
- 9.41 Image:Hall.jpg
- 9.42 Image:Hall.jpg
- 9.43 Image:9V-SKD2.jpg
- 9.44 Image:SQA380.jpg
- 9.45 Image:Cinematographe Lumiere.jpg
- 9.46 Image:Velneo_logo.JPG
- 9.47 Image:ALF-W.B._Saul_Agricultural_High_School,_April_2004.jpg
- 9.48 Image:ALFposter.jpg
- 9.49 Image:AD-AS.jpeg
- 9.50 UMD front images
- 9.51 Image:Athelstanobv2.jpg
10 June 10
- 10.1 Image:FLOU-Teatro.jpg
- 10.2 Image:Baklava-poster2-small.jpg
- 10.3 Image:Bowob-drupal-sea.jpg
- 10.4 Image:Bowob-wordpress-sun.jpg
- 10.5 Image:Bowob-sea.jpg
- 10.6 Image:ATARAXIA.jpg
- 10.7 Image:Ultreo1.jpg
- 10.8 Image:King Constantine II of Greece.jpg
- 10.9 Image:DSCI0134.JPG
- 10.10 User:Davapape
- 10.11 Image:Yves_Saint_Laurent.jpg
- 10.12 Image:Prescott Gurley Street in 1918.jpg
- 10.13 Image:TurkanaboyV.jpg
- 10.14 Image:Hyperbolic_sine.svg
- 10.15 Image:United States airline hubs.png
- 10.16 Image:DSC09873.JPG
- 10.17 Image:Inflation-1923.jpg
- 10.18 Image:Inflation-1923.jpg - second request
- 10.19 Image:Laurie_Lewis.jpg
- 10.20 Image:Bartholdi_Fontaine_des_Terreaux_Lyon_fondnuages.jpg
- 10.21 Image:Hasso_Eccard_von_Manteuffel_and_Heinrich_Freiherr_von_Luettwitz.jpg
- 10.22 Image:Hasso_Eccard_von_Manteuffel_and_Heinrich_Freiherr_von_Luettwitz.jpg
- 10.23 Image:Tortue_rayonnee.jpg
- 10.24 Image:Gigantoraptorczj.png
- 10.25 Image:Gigantoraptor_size1.png
- 10.26 Image:Cristeros_Caídos.jpg
11 June 11
- 11.1 Image:Creatures.jpg
- 11.2 Image:Zoltan_Gera.jpg
- 11.3 Category:Fujian Agricultrue and Forestry University
- 11.4 Image:Sviblova Tower of Kolomna Kremlin.gif
- 11.5 Image:Chris-evert.jpg
- 11.6 Image:SoldadoImperial.JPG
- 11.7 Image:YodaGetxo02.JPG
- 11.8 Image:MileyCyrus signature.png
- 11.9 Image:Taylor_Alison_Swift.jpg
- 11.10 Image:USS_Commodore_Perry.jpg
- 11.11 Image:100px-Cracovia_herb.png
- 11.12 Image:Drentscha_Aa_bij_de_Witte_molen.jpg
- 11.13 Image:Drentscha_Aa_bij-Glimmermade.jpg
- 11.14 Image:Présentation_D105.JPG
- 11.15 Image:Erb.jpg
- 11.16 Image:AS-W_with_PW.jpg
- 11.17 Image:The_lonely_girl.jpg
- 11.18 Image:Cd51-1000g.gif
- 11.19 Image:Tanith Lee.jpg
- 11.20 Image:Tupac_Shakur_Graffiti.jpg
- 11.21 Image:Tupac_Shakur_Graffiti.jpg
- 11.22 Image:Fogliephoto.jpg
- 11.23 Image:HAL_Kiran_Aero_India-2007.jpg
- 11.24 Image:Photo_042.jpg
- 11.25 Image:Fancy_Nothing.jpg
- 11.26 Image:EWSD2strana.JPG
- 11.27 Image:Canon de belleza occidental.jpg
- 11.28 Image:Assata_shakur2.jpg
- 11.29 Image:Erwin_Rommel_portrait.jpg
- 11.30 Image:Haj-adnan-in-haj.jpg
- 11.31 Image:Soon-Yi_Previn.jpg
- 11.32 Image:AuschwitzProtocolsmap.jpg
- 11.33 Image:Benidorm19.jpg
- 11.34 Image:Children_in_the_Holocaust_concentration_camp_liberated_by_Red_Army.jpg
12 June 12
- 12.1 Image:Mack_Trucks_new_logo.gif
- 12.2 Image:Crown_logo.png
- 12.3 Image:HortFl35.jpg
- 12.4 Image:Claudiosanchez.jpg
- 12.5 Image:HortFl45.JPG
- 12.6 Image:IPod_Line2.png
- 12.7 Template:GFDL-CC-triple
- 12.8 Image:Young_black_nude-2.jpg
- 12.9 Image:Wappen_Vogelsbergkreis.png
- 12.10 Image:OscarPeterson1984.jpg
- 12.11 Image:Nudity.jpg
- 12.12 Image:AC_Cobra_MKII_289.jpg
- 12.13 Image:Knud Knudsens plass.pdf
- 12.14 Image:Microraptorek.JPG
- 12.15 Sketches
- 12.16 Image:T-III.pdf
- 12.17 Image:Itmfa_rainbow.png
- 12.18 Image:Aceraspire3610.JPG
- 12.19 Image:Taric_Alani_Chaise_ass.jpg
- 12.20 Image:Dik_Trom_en_the_blind_girl_next_door_by_Johan_Braakensiek_end_of_19th_century.gif
- 12.21 Image:Ubicacion2.jpg
- 12.22 Image:Chio1111.jpg
- 12.23 Image:Warr guitar.gif
- 12.24 Image:Osjecko baranjska flag.gif
- 12.25 Image:Lazaro Cardenas.jpg
- 12.26 Image:Toyota camry hybrid mfd-consumption.jpg
- 12.27 Image:William Speirs Bruce.jpg
- 12.28 Image:Toyota camry hybrid mfd-energy.jpg
- 12.29 Image:The_first_page_of_my_school_reading_book.jpg
- 12.30 Image:Second_in_command_(Labeled).jpg
13 June 13
- 13.1 Image:BiografiaSaavedra.pdf
- 13.2 Image:EDduo-sociedade.pdf
- 13.3 Image:Kanymitrl.jpg
- 13.4 Image:Brazil_Porto_Alegre_Temple.jpg
- 13.5 Image:Female_nude.jpg
- 13.6 Image:Eiffel_65.jpg
- 13.7 Image:Erection2.JPG
- 13.8 Image:La Bipolaridad.pdf
- 13.9 Image:P6060023_Löwenstraße_22.jpg
- 13.10 Image:Madfeet.jpg
- 13.11 Image:Van_Keulen-Nieuwe_Pascaert_van_Oost_Indien-1680-1735-2.png
- 13.12 Image:Email-icon.png
- 13.13 Image:Phoque_de_Weddell_-_Weddell_Seal.gif
- 13.14 Image:Palacio_Dos_Martirios.jpg
- 13.15 Image:35tausfietswegwijzer.png
- 13.16 Image:The_Biscuit_Burners.jpg
- 13.17 Image:Great_Grounds_Aerial_shotfromSE.jpg
- 13.18 Image:Summerfest_Logo.JPG
- 13.19 Image:DjFalk.jpg
- 13.20 Image:Hirsebreifahrt03.JPG
- 13.21 Image:Castle of Good Hope Courtyard.jpg
- 13.22 Image:JR_logo_(east).svg
- 13.23 Image:HirosimaBeforeAfter.jpg
- 13.24 Image:Thelma Wood.jpg
- 13.25 Image:SpockIcon1007.gif
- 13.26 Image:Paintings below zero.jpg
- 13.27 Image:Paintings below zero with artist.jpg
- 13.28 Image:Paintings below zero from front.jpg
- 13.29 Images of Cape of Good Hope
- 13.30 Image:HK_Causeway_Bay_Russell_Street_Soundwill_Plaza_1.JPG
- 13.31 Image:Billy_Cardine.jpg
- 13.32 Images of Render422
14 June 14
- 14.1 Image:T-III.pdf
- 14.2 Image:Muslimgirl_and_Fedex.jpg
- 14.3 Image:Blue_bathroom.jpg
- 14.4 Image:Black_Venus.jpg
- 14.5 Image:Ukrainian_Kushnir.jpg
- 14.6 Image:Ht.JPG
- 14.7 Image:Adult-Stilt-Bug.jpg
- 14.8 Image:La Lira.pdf
- 14.9 Category:No category required
- 14.10 Image:Surmanews.png
- 14.11 Image:Goose_bay_aerial.jpg
- 14.12 Image:Stone_gods_rich.jpg
- 14.13 Image:Decepticons Logo.jpg
- 14.14 Image:Andres_gabrtiel_004.jpg
- 14.15 Image:Paulina-rubio2.jpg
- 14.16 Image:Paulinacd.jpg
- 14.17 Image:Pau_latina_paulina.jpg
- 14.18 Image:Ananda_paulina.jpg
- 14.19 Image:Tejero_golpe.jpg
- 14.20 Image:Disk.jpg
- 14.21 Image:Zune_iPod.jpg
- 14.22 Image:RIP_ChrisBenoit.gif
- 14.23 Image:Wweictitle.PNG
- 14.24 Image:Flag of Malaya Purga Reg (Udmurtia).gif
- 14.25 Image:Paulina-rubio.jpg
15 June 15
16 June 16
17 June 17
18 June 18
19 June 19
20 June 20
21 June 21
22 June 22
23 June 23
24 June 24
25 June 25
26 June 26
27 June 27
28 June 28
29 June 29
30 June 30

[edit] June 1

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:200px-Apocalyptica-I_Don't_Care.jpg

error uploading Shareminer 02:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, also copyvio. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Telegraphstamp.jpg

Better object exist. See this Nickpo 04:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - lower quality dupe & Not used. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 08:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted, but made a redirect, to Image:Spbtelegrafstamp1866.jpg

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 23:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Postage Stamp.jpg

postage stamp, issued in 1997 by Indian government. Thus, not public domain --Redtigerxyz 05:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ahmed Khadr in 1985 Pakistan.jpg

”misnamed” is reason given by Sherurcij on original incomplete DR request of 27 May 2008. (fix0r of incomplete DRs! --Brynn 05:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Speedy as unused dupe replaced by Image:Ahmed Khadr in 1995 Pakistan.jpg. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted (next time, rather than fixing a DR like this, use {{badname}} :)) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Zinfandel_grapes.jpg

Noncommercial license at Flickr source. Kelly 06:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Kanonkas_(talk) 07:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Newphy.jpg

Copyright violation. Transfered from EN wikipedia, where it was uploaded by mass copyright violator tagging all commercial images as PD-self --Renata3 07:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 07:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Olta Boka.jpg

Looks like a fair use pic from a website. See also sq:Figura:Olta Boka.jpg. --Mutter Erde 07:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete as copyvio. Mutter is correct - its tagged with a fair use template. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 08:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. Kanonkas_(talk) 08:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Umraojaan 4.jpg

screanshot from the movie can't be in Creative Commons -Dobromila 08:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Kanonkas_(talk) 08:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Granier.jpg

I doubt this is free to use, based on the source, as well as the category it was placed in, among other things. -Izno 09:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted per Izno, also the resolution's too low to be useful. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:WW2 - Baltic full-scale offensive, 1944 (general).jpg

No proper source, without an author death before 1938 this file can't be in the PD. A number of other images of the Uploader seems to have the same problem (if it is a problem). — Albert Krantz 18:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC).

Delete The image depicts a 1944 mission (-> can't be Pd-old-70), violation of Russian Copyright law. Vinhtantran 03:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tomba di Roberto il Guiscardo.jpg

I've added another version of this ancient monument with the real name (Image:Tomba degli Altavilla.jpg) --D.N.R. 11:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Note: User:D.N.R. has become User:Generale Lee

IMPORTANT: the correct-name image has since been deleted instead of this one! The Image:Tomba degli Altavilla.jpg should be undeleted, and this one deleted. 62.147.36.40 10:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Correctly named one restored, this one deleted. Please use {{badname}} next time. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 06:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Angelica_garzon_sanchez.JPG

Unused, not in COM:SCOPE. Dodo 10:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No source. Kanonkas_(talk) 11:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:08AshleyMedal.jpg

No license SwirlBoy39 13:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Kanonkas_(talk) 13:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:CCF15032008_00000.jpg

Copyright violation; image substantially consists of movie poster. enochlau (talk) 14:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete immediately. Clear copyvio. Derivative work. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:CUHK.svg

Copyright violation; you cannot usurp the university's copyright over its logo by recreating it (identically) from scratch. enochlau (talk) 14:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Depends. How long has the university used this insignia? Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Exact copy of copyrighted logo, this school founded in 1963[1]. Vinhtantran 13:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. As copyvio. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ccshslogo.jpg

Copyright violation; no indication that it's been licensed freely. enochlau (talk) 14:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete speedy as copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:A_Black_Cat01b700px.gif

Own work of art, absolutly out of COM:SCOPE 79.196.123.124 15:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Eh. Its a painting of a cat. I could see it being useful. Plus it is based off another commons image which is kinda cool. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep as awesome. You can never have enough cat depictions. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 06:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

kept, could be useful, is used on talkpages atm.,

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 23:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Editix_schema_editor.png

Copyright violation; screenshot of commercial software. enochlau (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, simple {{copyvio}} case. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Balagangadhara_video_still.jpg

The title of this image indicates that this is probably a screenshot of a video, thus making this licensable under fair use. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This is indeed a screenshot of a video (available on YouTube). I don't see why it would be licensable since I have made the video (recorded and edited) it entirely myself. (talk)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DSCF0082.JPG

Bad filename -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinqui (talk • contribs) 2008-06-01 (UTC)

Keep Why not use {{rename}} instead? --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, dupe of Image:Daisenguchi station monument.jpg, use {{badname}} next time plox Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ll.jpg

Google is not a source - and does not tie in with a PD-self claim --Sfan00 IMG 17:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete speedy as copyvio --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Copyright violation. Kanonkas_(talk) 19:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DSCF0088.JPG

Bad filename --—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinqui (talk • contribs) 2008-06-01 (UTC)

Keep Why not {{rename}} instead? --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as duplicate of Image:Daisenguchi station east.jpg. Please use {{badname}} next time. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FlandriaWsch..gif

Copyright violation from http://www.fotw.net/flags/be-vov.html, but should be replaced (used on more than 50 pages on nl:) before deleting. Kameraad Pjotr 18:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as simple copyvio. Sorry, but we can't host copyright violations just because one wiki has nothing to replace it with. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Zorro colorado.jpg

Reasons for deletion request : I uploaded this file with wrong name, file with correct name "Zorro gris" already loaded to replace this one.-Eassi 19:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Please use {{badname}} next time. Kanonkas_(talk) 20:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tol_1.jpg

Self made? I really doubt that to be honest. (size and format make me think of a website promotional photol) Lucasbfr 19:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Looks clearly like a copyvio. --Kanonkas_(talk) 20:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Looks pro. Assume copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Duly assumed. Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Våbenskjold-Ahlefeldt-Laurvig.jpg

Changed from {{Copyvio}}: Image created in 1929 and no documentation presented why the artist should have died more than 70 years ago. Kameraad Pjotr 19:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete, need evidence. Vinhtantran 02:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Missing Date, Missing Author, cited website. Copyvio. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Queen_Elizabeth_II_inspects_the_garde_at_Expo67,_Montréal.jpg

Per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ROCKEROS_y_BORREGOS.pdf

Advertising/Text - Out of Scope ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Klim Kamenko.pdf

Personal biography Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 05:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted --Kanonkas_(talk) 07:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Kanonkas: Out of project scope: Text document. Private biography

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sophia_iznutri.jpg

Not a two-dimensional work of art, PD-art does not apply. Kjetil_r 12:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Do you suspect it is copyrighed?
If this photo is original work of uploader - just change {{PD-art}} to {{PD-old}}. If you suspect copyright violation - tell why, I do not see any printing artefacts. Julo 14:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I consider this a copyright violation because it comes from artclassic.edu.ru, according to the description page. There is nothing that indicates that this is the uploader's work. --Kjetil_r 14:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Did you not see the description that it is a really old cathedral in Kiev ? It is an art class trip to a cathedral in Russia. It is properly linked to two active Categories. It is the uploaders work like the other 2,000,000 photos on Commons, they had the camera. WayneRay 14:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay

Yes, I know that it is a 11th century cathedral. But how do you know that it is the uploader's own work? The discription does not say so, the contrary is actually claimed when the PD-art tag is used. --Kjetil_r 15:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The license tag is for some reason changed to PD-old [2]. I doubt that the photo was taken 70+ years ago. --Kjetil_r 20:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete There wasn't coloured film 70 years ago. {{PD-art}} cannot be used here, either because of 3D art. Vinhtantran 03:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment There were color films 70 years ago, I have some Agfa diapositives made by my grandpa in 1930's. See also Technicolor. Julo 06:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete, unless the uploader proves the PD status. artclassic.edu.ru says it is copyrighted by the Prosvescheniye publisher, and is hosted on Microsoft-IIS (which makes it more likely to be a very-non-free site). I couldn't find the image on the site. --AVRS 16:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No evidence that the copyright owner (the photographer) has released this under a free licence MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Adolf Bertram.jpg

"I withdraw the copyrights" is reason given on original incomplete DR by Romancop, who is the uploader, on 10 April 2008. (fix0r of incomplete DRs --Brynn 04:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC))

Keep It is marked as PD-Old. You can't withdraw the copyrights. So unless PD-Old no longer applies - it should stay. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Unless someone can provide the author and source of the image, or a solid reason why this image should be considered public domain. --Kam Solusar 20:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete As Kam Solusar. Vinhtantran 03:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No sensible source. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Daniel_alcides.jpg

Source is given as website; license tag is self-made public domain. enochlau (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Image originally from bnp.gob.pe . Copyvio unless someone knows about Peruvian PD laws (looks like a possible government group) --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, copyright violation. Kameraad Pjotr 13:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:4_MONTAGNE_STE_VICTOIRE_1.jpg

Photo of modern painting. I think Commons:OTRS permission is necessary. EugeneZelenko 15:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment The image's description indicates that these are copies of works by Cézanne. If they are faithful reproductions and the original Cézanne works are PD, then these might just be PD as well. I'm not familiar enough with Cézanne's own work to say how close they are to the original, nor am I familiar with the provisions in French law around faithful reproductions, but this deletion request should probably receive attention from relative experts in both those areas. Werewombat 18:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Unused low quality image showing four paintings, painted by someone non-noteable, hanging on a wall in front of a horrible striped wallpaper. Image also shows some collector's car models in the right bottom corner. Out of scope, we're not somebody's private photo album, and this is really not worth the time spent on a grand copyright investigation (or, indeed, on writing this rationale). Lupo 14:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Uecker by Wolleh.jpg

Derivative Work, but no permission by Guenther Uecker. Permission is only granted by Lothar Wolleh, photographer. Not by Guenther Uecker. --Syrcro 18:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I'm fairly sure the photog has permission from the artist (as he is standing in the picture). --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

A GFDL-permission in 1969. Wow, sounds like Nostradsmus. Syrcro 21:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sarcasm does not help. If the Artist gave permission for the photographer to take the picture and do with it as he pleases, which is obvious that he did.... Then we dont care about the artist. All we care about is what the Photog says. And he says (according to OTRS) GFDL. So it is. The picture is legal, and we can move on. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

A permission just to take a picture isn't a permission to do with it as he [the Potogrpher] pleases. Syrcro 07:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh, if it's not a work for hire (a very narrow category), then yes, the photographer can do whatever he pleases with it (personality rights notwithstanding). Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 07:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong: Commons:Derivative works . Syrcro 10:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I misunderstood: Are you saying that this is a derivative work of the bed of nails or what? Also, I haven't read the OTRS ticket; but if it says that the artist has given the photographer permission to do whatever he likes with the picture, than that's good enough for me. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The ticket (2007041710005809) includes the permission of the photographer specified on the image description page to publish the image (and 4 other images) under the conditions of the GNU Free Documentation License. There is no permission email by the artist, and no information on whether or not the artist agrees with that license is being provided. —Pill (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep The photographer says the picture is GDFL. If it isn't so then this is his fault because of missinforming. --Avron 00:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Ticket 2008051110020228 contains a statement by the photographer that there is no permission of the artist. Hence we are talking about a derivative work of a copyrighted, unreleased piece of art. Note: I reverted ShakataGaNai’s closure of this deletion request. Code·is·poetry 21:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, the ticket I mentioned is not on this cause, we got only the one Pill named above. Code·is·poetry 22:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

OK. Clarification needed. The claim is this is a potential violation of Guenther Uecker's rights. What rights? The copyright on the bed of nails thing (if that exists)? Or the copyright of the photo? (You are citing COM:DW, so I assume it's not a likeness/personality issue since that only deals with copyright). Rocket000 (talk) 03:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW, authors are given exclusive rights by default. The subject of the work has absolutely no say over what license the copyright holder chooses. And remember things can be relicense; of course it wasn't GFDL in 1969 but it is now. Rocket000 (talk) 03:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Uecker is as a popular artist a public figure. I see no reason for a violation of Guenther Uecker's rights. Uecker came forward in the fifties with his nail pictures. We can talk about a violation of Guenther Uecker's rights when he is naked. --Zita (talk) 09:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

The nail-thing is a work of art, so the photo of if is a DW, but there is no licence by Uecker. Syrcro (talk) 14:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The licenced photo itself is an artwork. --Zita (talk) 19:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

It is, but "just" a derivative work of that nail-what-ever. Syrcro (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Three would like to keep it. You would like to delete it! So let`s keep it until Uecker want to delete it, right!? --Zita (talk) 08:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Delete No reason to keep it: It's a copyrighted work and no permission is given by the author. "So let`s keep it until Uecker want to delete it" >>>>> Oh, ok! So let's forget all that trash about "Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content. So all content of the Wikimedia Commons is available under some free license, meaning that..." (COM:PS). Forrester [[ hate+love letters ]] 14:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep I think that the permission from the photographer is enough for us. Yann (talk) 15:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Why? Forrester [[ hate+love letters ]] 15:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. It is clear that the bed of nails is a 3D artwork created by Guenther Uecker, and that he has copyright in that artwork. Commons has no licence from him releasing his rights in any way. Of course, he knew the photograph was being taken (assuming that is him in it), but where is his premission which allows the photographer validly to release an image of that copright artwork under GDFL? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC) MichaelMaggs

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg

Copyright violation; logo probably not user-made public domain. enochlau (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete speedy as copyvio. Fair use'd on en.wp. Originally from [3]. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg

This image has been deleted some days before as copyvio, reuploaded and still, copyvio Vinhtantran 02:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Again... --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 2

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Marcus_Tallberg2.JPG

Probable Copyvio. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 00:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Requisitospw.png

Out of Scope. Can be easily replaced with wikitables instead. This is software requirements for "Perfect World" MMORPG. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Spacebirdy: Off-Topic: Please see Commons inclusion policy

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Alesana2_2.jpg

Copyvio - Publicity shot for ... a band? ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BauchklangPhil.jpg

Probable copyvio - http://www.urban-link.at/bilder/Bauchklang_200.jpg ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Additionally:
- File:BauchklangHubs.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:BauchklangBoxx.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:BauchklangBina.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:BauchklangAndy.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:Bauchklang3.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:Bauchklang2.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:Bauchklang1.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
- File:Bauchklang.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
--ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, obvious copyvios. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nick2_Assassin.PNG

Out of Scope. Also a badly modified dupe of Image:Nick Assassin.jpg. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted, both as offtopic,

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 22:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Hardiman.jpg

Copyvio suspect - Looks like a pro job. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Well yeah it's a copyvio. It's actually written "inconnu" (="unknown" in French) for the source and the author! So it's just that the uploader is not aware of Commons rules. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:RosieMalek-Yonan.jpg

Looks like a pro shot - but I can't find the source. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I am the owner of the shot. I uploaded it to add to this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farah_Mir . This is a character page for Rosie Malek-Yonan. RMY

Question: Where did this image come from? It looks professional. Granted I can't find a source, I just get weary of anything pro looking. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- I took the photo. I'll take the "pro looking" as a compliment :-) Where do I indicate that to clear this up? RMY
  - We'll need the photographers (you) real name and permission sent to COM:OTRS. They'll tag the image with the OTRS permission and all will be taken care of. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    - Okay, will do. RMY
      - A release and permission has been sent via e-mail. Do not delete this photo until you have reviewed my e-mail. Thanks. RMY 09:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, Permission confirmed by OTRS--Bapti ✉ 14:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif

(commons does not allow fair use images) --Veverica 08:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Badseed: No fair use at Commons: copyright FIBA

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif

(commons does not allow fair use images) --Veverica 08:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Badseed: No fair use at Commons: copyright FIBA

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vinometer.1.jpg

My image, supplanted by better image Vinometer.1b.jpg, please delete this one, thanks. Maikel 11:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

gelöscht,

lG., --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 22:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fänks! Maikel (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Yves_Saint-Laurent.jpg

Unlikely to be the work of the flickr user 217.33.136.242 12:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yup, deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Psicotomimetismo.JPG

ERROR Jorbrand 15:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Speedy. Text - Out of Scope. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted,

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 22:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Scan0001.JPG

private life protection Auseklis 19:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Privacy protection is not much of an issue since the uploader is the person in question. On the other hand, stamps may be protected by copyright. Rama 20:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Ahonc (non-admin close) --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Woman_clitoris.jpg

No purpose, not used in an article. 216.15.111.243 21:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Female_genitalia,_with_hand_(1654).jpg

No purpose, not linked to any article. 216.15.111.243 21:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg

No purpose, not linked to any article, pornographic. 216.15.111.243 21:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg

Not an image that should be uploaded right here DerAndre (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Keep Nothing wrong with it. If you don't like porn, don't look at it. -Nard the Bard 01:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep I see no reason why it should be deleted. This is just another case of "I don't like it, it should be deleted!" --FP (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Kept Once again... "I dont like it" isn't a valid reason. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 20:25, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tims_wife.jpg

No purpose, not linked to any article, pornographic. 216.15.111.243 21:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

~~Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)~~

Deletion request re-opened.

Delete This is a perfectly proper request, and the image should be deleted as the permission of the subject has not been provided. See COM:PEOPLE. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep She posed for the camera. The photos are out there. Our use of it doesn't "violate" any mystical rights. If we were first publishers maybe but it's on flickr. Plus the USA doesn't really have moral rights, and the photo appears to be American. -N 12:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not to do with moral rights in the legal sense, but in the ethical. "She posed for the picture" is self-evidently true, but irrelevant. Where is the evidence that she knew that her picture was going to be released publicly, and that she consented? There should be an OTRS ticket if she did. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - I think there needs to be a real debate about this somewhere. Porn - as in beauty & art - is in the eye of the beholder. I hate to admit it but it is just possible that I have found sites on the internet in the past where this type of picture the standard content - they are termed "adult" sites. The fact that it exists elsewhere is not a reason why we should have it (indeed I would tend to argue the reverse in this case - it is available elsewhere so why do we want it?). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Eyða, out of scope, no permission of the individual. --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 10:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Several issues with the image. First, highly intimate images of this kind if released without permission could cause serious harm to the individual. Commons, as an advocate for collection of free content, should be setting a high standard for all aspects of collecting, storing, licensing, and the reuse of our content. With images such as these, this requires determining if there is strong evidence that the image was released with the permission of the the subject of the photo, and the subject fully understood that the image would be published under a license that allowed unlimited reuse with proper attribution. I do not see evidence that the subject is aware of the release of this image and therefore feel that the image should be removed until it is obtained.

Second, Commons images are collected for a purpose. Unlike Flickr, Commons is not intended to be a location where private images are stored. Images need to have a purpose. In general, Commons does not police this aspect of uploads as a high priority because of the high demand for examining more pressing licensing issue. But when we are discussing an image such as this one, it is worthwhile to examine the image to see if it fits Commons mission. In my opinion, there is a significant downside to hosting an unlimited number of pornographic images that needs to be addressed in our discussion. As Herby implies in his comment, Commons is not "adult site" and collecting an unlimited number of pornographic images will cause us to be seen as one by outside organizations. This needs to be be one consideration. Will collecting an unlimited number of these images harm our relationship with other organizations? In reality, I think it does. Some institutions, even those that respect the idea of free exchange of ideas and are opposed to censorship, would not collaborate with organizations appear to have this as a primary mission. As responsible stewards of Commons future, this aspect of the discussion should not be ignored.

That said, when examining the merits of including this particular image, I do not think that this image is a horrible example of a female in a sexually explicit pose. If I had to choose between this image and others that I've seen uploaded to Commons and Wikipedia-en, this one is of higher quality and taste. But beyond the issue of quality and taste, I do have a concern about the use of this image. It is not possible from the image to clearly determine the age of the subject. I suspect she is over the age of consent, but it is not clear. I'm extremely reluctant to keep sexually provocative (sexually explicit, in this case) images on site unless the subject is obviously over the age of consent.

Because of these concerns, I suggest the image be deleted until the issues are resolved. FloNight ♥♥♥ 12:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 01:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:TESIS DOCTORAL.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Explanation of a Doctoral Thesis Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Definition? Out of scope. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Archivos Universitarios en el Perú.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Article on University of Peru Archives Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete out of scope --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ResumeBLANK-1-.pdf

Resume outline Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Blank --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Frank Hecker.pdf

fake Bio Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete out of scope. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Parque podocarpus.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. University technical paper Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete out of scope --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:M24asociados.pdf

Business ad Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 21:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete advert --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PARADOJAS HIDROSTÁTICAS.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Historical article Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 21:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete print of wikipedia info - out of scope. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Aiwass_foto1.JPG

Suspect Copyvio. Album cover perhaps? ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, looks like a copyvio. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 17:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:MusicIsOurWay.jpg

After a google search for “no drugs”, this was one of the first images that appeared in the search results. Definately not PD. — H92 (t · c · no) 23:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Good call, I too was concerned with that upload over all. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 15:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Maradonahand3.jpg

Derived from copyrighted source, fair use claimed -N 17:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The original image contained a photograph of the alleged hand of God goal (which is why it there's the fair use stuff), I removed that and the present image is available under a free licence, as far as I can tell. I can undelete the original photo on en.wiki if you want to see what I'm wittering on about. Nick 19:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

What are you wittering on about? Nice clear photo though.

The present image is a hand-drawn illustration. There is no photo involved. Oppose deletion. 70.145.96.22 16:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete Claims fair use. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep, uploader's won work. Not a derivative of something not free. --Kjetil_r 10:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, this has gone on long enough. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 15:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lizas_Labiaplastie.jpg

Refusing to state the obvious. Dorftrottel 04:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Refusing to state what obvious? The pictures demonstrate something and aren't missing any crucial information... --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep I see no good reason in that deletion request. A close-up of vulva. A genital piercing. So what? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Refusing to state the obvious. Siebrand 11:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gotta_stand_up.jpg

Refusing to state the obvious. Dorftrottel 04:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Refusing to state what obvious? The pictures demonstrate something and aren't missing any crucial information... --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I see no good reason in that deletion request. Peeing is life. And we don't even see her face. There's no problem at all. The only problem might be your lack of objective reason for this DR. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep FxJ 18.07.2008

Kept. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HUT_students_in_ao_dai.jpg

This is image is photo of many people's face, and the photographer is not the only who keep the copyright. Can uploaded assure that he has permissions from all of them? Vinhtantran 11:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep the people depicted hold no copyrights in the photo; and as this was taken in a public place there are no personality rights/privacy issues here. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep --Jacopo Werther 06:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. No need for consent per Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. --06:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)MichaelMaggs

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fellatio-real.jpg

pornographic- Vicond 16:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

~~{{vk}} Speedy.~~ Commons is not censored. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Not because it is pornographic, but because the file size and image quality would indicate that this is a copyvio, likely extracted from a website.--Brynn 04:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Ok, after taking a second look - I agree. Probably a screen cap from a video. copyvio --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  - Delete Obvious copyviol. --Jacopo Werther 06:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Obvious copyvio --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 08:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment So,for you User:ShakataGaNai and User:Brynn, this image can't be considered pornographic.Exacly,I can't explain why not,.That means that I can send to commons so many images like that without problem,yes or not? Oh sorry!with the corresponding licence and permission.So,I will take it into account for the next occations. Vicond
- Comment Commons allows for any sort of material that could be useful. See our project scope. Generally hardcore pornographic material serves little purpose and will be deleted. Otherwise, as long as _you_ made the work, or the work has been released into a free license by the author (for example, on Flickr) - we will accept it. That being said - if you didn't create the work - there needs to be proof that the work and been release into a free license. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Not because it is pornographic, but because poor quality and copyvio.--Econt 15:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Waterhouse_Echo_and_Narcissus.jpg

Changed from {{Copyvio}} PD-Art does not apply in the UK. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 15:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC); but has this image enough originality to be protected by copyright? Kameraad Pjotr 18:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I have always said and still think that we should not be paranoid as to the stupid English laws regarding PD-Art. Keep. --AndreasPraefcke 19:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep per above Notwist 00:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a rule for using PD-Art on Commons: Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag, and no discussion to have. Similar cases where all deleted.

I find very—I mean very—annoying that a Commons sysop don't apply rules. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 14:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. You may not like the law in the UK but we are bound to follow it. Sorry. MichaelMaggs 06:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

UK laws apply in the UK so the rest of the world can use it and the UK can block in their own country if they wish.

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Strudwick_-_A_Golden_Thread.jpg

Changed from {{Copyvio}} PD-Art is not allowed in UK. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 17:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC), this is a scan from a book, but was the image in the book original enough for copyright protection? Kameraad Pjotr 18:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a rule for using PD-Art on Commons: Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag, and no discussion to have. Similar cases where all deleted.

I find very—I mean very—annoying that a Commons sysop don't apply rules. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 14:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. You may not like the law in the UK but we are bound to follow it. Sorry.MichaelMaggs 06:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lorrain_-_Ascagne_(1682).jpg

Changed from {{Copyvio}}: PD-Art is not allowed in UK. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 17:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC), but is there enough originality for copyright protection? Kameraad Pjotr 18:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a rule for using PD-Art on Commons: Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag, and no discussion to have. Similar cases where all deleted.

I find very—I mean very—annoying that a Commons sysop don't apply rules. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 14:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. You may not like the law in the UK but we are bound to follow it. Sorry. MichaelMaggs 06:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Biografia_felinto.JPG

Picture illegible, not categorized and used in no article. More, it appears that there's no entry about this person in any Wikipedia (according to this Google test) Pymouss Tchatcher - 18:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Speedy because of no source, no license. Vinhtantran 02:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Out of scope. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ecology_Ernst_Haeckel_1.svg

This is not usable by any current or future Wikimedia project (art by unknown artist). Kenmayer 20:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Semi-corrupted. The "thumbnail" version doesn't work. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete For the same reasons stated in here JohnManuel 23:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Karpas&Co.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. One sentence Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 21:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete text out of scope. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DEmo ESPANOL.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Business ad Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 21:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete out of scope --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FBW Satzung.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FBW Namensaenderung.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FBW Gruendung.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nationale AbmeldungFP.pdf

Military or Government Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FBW Aufloesungsbeschluss.pdf

Military or government Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FBW Aufloesungsbeschluss.pdf

Military or government Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 20:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete text. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vittorio pernigucci.pdf

Biography Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 21:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete out of scope biography --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Ahonc: In category Unknown as of 27 May 2008; no license

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HowTOsaveAdocument.pdf

Out of scope text doc. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom — H92 (t · c · no) 00:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, also copyrighted screenshots Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 22:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HowTOsaveAdocument1.pdf

Out of scope text document. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom — H92 (t · c · no) 00:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, also copyrighted screenshots Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 22:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sin_título4.jpg

Out of Scope - cut off logo from an art gallery? ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Regardles of scope considerations, it is a copyvio. Werewombat 18:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. --- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sega 32x.jpeg

not needed at all --

Apparently, someone nominated this for deletion but didn't create the subpage. I've created the subpage so we can settle this matter. Red Phoenix 16:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep The reason for deletion given was "not needed at all", and since when is that a reason to delete a free image? Also, it is needed, let me explain. I'm a user from en.wikipedia, but I have this account just for commons matters. Two articles I work with there are an article on the Sega 32X and a list of games for the 32X. Given that the 32X is unusual in that it plugs into the top of the Mega Drive/Genesis, it is a rare console since it only sold 200,000 units, and that it generally helps the respective article, I would say it is very much needed, not to mention this is a free image that doesn't appear to have any copyright issues. Red Phoenix 16:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep definitely keep it, not reason to delete it. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, usable and used on many projects. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vivi and Torben.jpg

pornographic-Vicond 16:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Is there a known problem of copyvio or a particular reason not to trust the uploader? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 18:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep this user seems to like nom'ing porn. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Well he just thinks it's forbidden on Commons. And I can understand one may think that. But the only question we may ask is: is it a copyvio? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 21:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
CommentI'm not with the requester but the license is questionable. Source "Finn E.B." ??? Author "TM" ??? --Avron 00:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it's weird! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 08:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Tagged {{no permission}} because of the weird authorship info. Lupo 07:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment I also tagged other pictures in the category:Vivi Berens, except for Image:Vivi Berens.jpg for which the author and the uploader seem to be the same. It's actually weird that it's the only non-nude pic of her. Just a supposition: it looks like the uploader knew this person before her porn carreer, had a personal picture of her and use that as a kind of fake proof her porn images have also been taken by him. Could I be right? BTW, there already was a short DR for one picture of this woman. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 07:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Guys, there's one more problem: this is probably CP. Most of these photos were taken in 1979. The subject was born December 12, 1961. Which means the odds of the subject being 18 in these photos is minimal. Which means OH SHI-

Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 09:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:2Ameripol.JPG

Copyvio ? ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete, this organization was founded in 2007. Vinhtantran 02:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Copyvio Trixt (talk) 23:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:JeremyDSilverman.jpg

Obviously pro shot. Uploading username claims to be subject though. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, uploading username is subject. Was "pro shot" by username's sister-in-law for free and for free-use.

Ok. I tagged the image with {{npd}} instead. Get COM:OTRS Permission and all will be well. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Siebrand: In category Unknown as of 5 June 2008; no permission

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Thomas Friedli.gif

this photograph is already present on this website which indicates that the data are copyrighted. The uploader indicates that he is the owner (that might be true); I'm not sure it's allowed to upload here a document that was placed with an other license in an website. I ask for a check by someone who knows it. Thanks --Hercule 19:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Must send a license mail if it has been published first elsewhere. Vinhtantran 02:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Tagged with {{npd}} --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Siebrand: In category Unknown as of 5 June 2008; no permission

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Franco-Corelli-Trovatore.jpg

copyvio : the image is from a jacket of a disk dated 1964, obviously cannot be in public domain --P-e 06:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Copyvio. Vinhtantran 02:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Rama: Copyright violation

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mot_so_kieu_ao_dai_le_hoi.JPG

This is a faced photo of many people. Can uploader assure that he's been given permission from all of them? Photographer is not the only one who keep copyright in this situation. Vinhtantran 11:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I don't see a reason for deletion. That is solely the problem of the uploader. -- Mattes 12:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

@Mattes: That is solely the problem of the uploader. Sorry, but that is ...! In addition to the nice attitude with the uploader (we don't care if you get problems if we only can have your images), if an image violates the personality rights of the depicted person(s), the image has to go. But this should not be a problem in this case as this is a group and they were obviously posing for the photo. --Túrelio 15:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep as I've said in a related DR, the photographer holds the copyright, not the subjects; as this was taken in a public place there are no privacy issues at stake either. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Wining.jpg

Out of Scope ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment One of the pictured person is the author/user. Pic for profile? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Not for profile. There were a series of pictures from some sort of high school water pistol assassin game. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 06:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Yannick_Jaulin.JPG

Far too motion blured to be of any use to anyone. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

it's a kind of artistic picture. I don't understand why it should be delated --—Preceding unsigned comment added by auberlin (talk • contribs) 2008-06-02 (UTC)

Comment Hey, It was just my thought that it wouldn't have a use. So I nominate it - that doesn't mean it will be deleted. That is for the community to decide. Feel free to put {{vk}} down though - so people know you want to vote to keep it. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Self-portrait that might be only made for the user's profile. Just like my blurry pic on my profile actually! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete That's a good speculation, but it's not used in a user profile on any Wikimedia project. Delete per nom. Werewombat 21:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Could be for a profile, but is not in use as suchMichaelMaggs (talk) 10:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Chaitoc.jpg

How can we be sure that the painter is the one who give this to ibilio? BTW, Ibilio is not a trusted source, even worse than Flickr about Another-one's-work-but-I-licensed. Vinhtantran 11:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. From a website that trusts the uploaders to make sure the images they upload are free. Hmm. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Plataforma_logística_de_Elvas_caia.JPG

and other images uploaded by Xfparreira (talk · contributions).

Doesn't look like own work: bad quality, low resolution. EugeneZelenko 15:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nancy-Periquita.jpg

template only valid for photos, not for drawings -- Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 ^commons _es 17:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete, Copyvio. Vinhtantran 02:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Belgrano.jpg

There is no author information. Thialfi 18:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Poglavnik.jpg

"personal collection" doesn't seem to be a good source --Mazbln 20:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This is the only picture from user Picturesc. Proposal sounds reasonable. --Ante Perkovic 10:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Scarface_logo.jpg

I’m not quite sure whether this is copyvio or PD-textlogo. — H92 (t · c · no) 20:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep PD-textlogo. Vinhtantran 03:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Porto-Rico-demography.png

the source link is dead and no proof is provided that the website released it under a CC license Madmax32 08:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment to Madmax32 - Use this --FSHL 08:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
OpposeFao say : Data contained in this database or software may be used freely,provided that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) be cited as the source.. The graphic is original, by me, with data of FAO, I source the datas. Where the problem ? :) --Valérie75 08:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Oppose Fao data may be used freely --OliverZena 16:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep Here is their copyright page as of Feb 15, 05. It says "Data contained in this database or software may be used freely,provided that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) be cited as the source." Its cited as the source - so we're good to go. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:LogoIntroSpection.jpg

Logo for something. Uploader claims to be owner. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Personal art is out of scope MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Conference_day_1.JPG

media is lacking author information. Cnuuk 07:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete speedy as copyvio. Source is a website. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment: I moved this from wiki to commons, the original uploader was en:User:Jeffpw. If the image gets deleted here, I suggest someone uploads it back on wiki again. EliasAlucard / Discussion 19:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The website does say "©-free 2006 Adelaide Institute". --MichaelMaggs 06:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

"©-free 2006 Adelaide Institute" looks okay to me. Keep and retag. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 09:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- The en:Adelaide Institute isn´t very trustworthy. --Cnuuk (talk) 08:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  - The en:Adelaide Institute is trustworthy enough for allowing their images to be uploaded on Commons. EliasAlucard / Discussion 19:45, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep and use proper tag. EliasAlucard / Discussion 19:45, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, proper tag added. Kameraad Pjotr 13:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Karte Obed-Kultur.png

Redundance to image:Map Ubaid culture-de.svg, just a work version which is no longer needed. --NNW 16:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC) --NNW 16:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Speedy, redundance. Vinhtantran 03:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Kameraad Pjotr 13:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Guntherpancke.jpg

Photo taken ca. 1940 by an unknown author, according to the uploader. Even if the author remained anonymous (no proof given), it would be copyrighted until 70 years after publication. -- Kam Solusar 20:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep This was a random photograph, not every photo taken holds a copyright. Many of the photos were seized prior and were under ownership of the government. This one here is taken in a rally, Pancke was flanked by many other soldiers. There were many anonymous photographers, and this photo holds true to no known author, therefore allowing it to be categorized as anonymous. Zarbon (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Copyright lasts until 2010 (minimum). Kameraad Pjotr 13:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Batalla_de_ayohuma.jpg

There is no author information Thialfi 18:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Maxim: Deleted because "In category Unknown as of 29 June 2008; no license/permission/source". using TW

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tims_wife.jpg

No purpose, not linked to any article, pornographic. 216.15.111.243 21:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

~~Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)~~

Deletion request re-opened.

Delete This is a perfectly proper request, and the image should be deleted as the permission of the subject has not been provided. See COM:PEOPLE. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep She posed for the camera. The photos are out there. Our use of it doesn't "violate" any mystical rights. If we were first publishers maybe but it's on flickr. Plus the USA doesn't really have moral rights, and the photo appears to be American. -N 12:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not to do with moral rights in the legal sense, but in the ethical. "She posed for the picture" is self-evidently true, but irrelevant. Where is the evidence that she knew that her picture was going to be released publicly, and that she consented? There should be an OTRS ticket if she did. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - I think there needs to be a real debate about this somewhere. Porn - as in beauty & art - is in the eye of the beholder. I hate to admit it but it is just possible that I have found sites on the internet in the past where this type of picture the standard content - they are termed "adult" sites. The fact that it exists elsewhere is not a reason why we should have it (indeed I would tend to argue the reverse in this case - it is available elsewhere so why do we want it?). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Eyða, out of scope, no permission of the individual. --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 10:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Several issues with the image. First, highly intimate images of this kind if released without permission could cause serious harm to the individual. Commons, as an advocate for collection of free content, should be setting a high standard for all aspects of collecting, storing, licensing, and the reuse of our content. With images such as these, this requires determining if there is strong evidence that the image was released with the permission of the the subject of the photo, and the subject fully understood that the image would be published under a license that allowed unlimited reuse with proper attribution. I do not see evidence that the subject is aware of the release of this image and therefore feel that the image should be removed until it is obtained.

Second, Commons images are collected for a purpose. Unlike Flickr, Commons is not intended to be a location where private images are stored. Images need to have a purpose. In general, Commons does not police this aspect of uploads as a high priority because of the high demand for examining more pressing licensing issue. But when we are discussing an image such as this one, it is worthwhile to examine the image to see if it fits Commons mission. In my opinion, there is a significant downside to hosting an unlimited number of pornographic images that needs to be addressed in our discussion. As Herby implies in his comment, Commons is not "adult site" and collecting an unlimited number of pornographic images will cause us to be seen as one by outside organizations. This needs to be be one consideration. Will collecting an unlimited number of these images harm our relationship with other organizations? In reality, I think it does. Some institutions, even those that respect the idea of free exchange of ideas and are opposed to censorship, would not collaborate with organizations appear to have this as a primary mission. As responsible stewards of Commons future, this aspect of the discussion should not be ignored.

That said, when examining the merits of including this particular image, I do not think that this image is a horrible example of a female in a sexually explicit pose. If I had to choose between this image and others that I've seen uploaded to Commons and Wikipedia-en, this one is of higher quality and taste. But beyond the issue of quality and taste, I do have a concern about the use of this image. It is not possible from the image to clearly determine the age of the subject. I suspect she is over the age of consent, but it is not clear. I'm extremely reluctant to keep sexually provocative (sexually explicit, in this case) images on site unless the subject is obviously over the age of consent.

Because of these concerns, I suggest the image be deleted until the issues are resolved. FloNight ♥♥♥ 12:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 01:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Streikbrökelmann.jpg

no author named, but imho really old! abf /talk to me/ 13:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

As this is not a work of art, it needn't to have a single author. This was very probably collectively produced by the same people who also issued this paper, i.e. the de:Christlicher Metallarbeiterverband. It's legal successor is the de:Christliche Gewerkschaft Metall. The then had of the umbrella organisation de:Christliche Gewerkschaft was de:Karl Matthias Schiffer who died in 1930. --Túrelio 15:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep, collective work from 1913, so should be covered by {{Anonymous-EU}}. --rimshot^talk 19:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Lupo 14:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:MacBook_Air_1.jpg

Contains visible copyrighted material like simpsons figure. Petar Marjanovic 16:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:MacBook_Air_1.jpg

I thought about the undeletion again and I got the problem into my mind wich was not mentiont in the last discussions: Its cc-by! Means you can cut and license it again as cc-by. So if you cut Homers Image it would also be cc-by. With cc-by-nd the last undeletion reason might have been valid, but not here. So I herby request to Delete it. abf /talk to me/ 13:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Mmm, what? If the original was cc-by, and it's been edited and licensed as cc-by, what's the issue? Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Clear derivative work of Mac OS X and copyrighted matereal. Or just blank computer screen. --EugeneZelenko 15:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete again. A quote from the undeletion request: I discussed this matter with ABF (the deleting administrator), and he/she indicated that the deletion was based upon the argument by Rocket000 that "this is pretty much a screenshot of non-free software, which we delete." In fact, this isn't "pretty much a screenshot," as the clear purpose is to illustrate the computer, not to illustrate software. So based on either person's logic there (mine or David Levy's) the copyright material doesn't need to be there. Rocket000 19:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I don't think it was rightly undeleted in the first place. Copyright overrules consensus. Rocket000 19:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

here it is.

Idea: blank the screen and detour. I'll do that when I have a minute. Rama 11:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:MacBook Air black.jpg edward 21:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

comment Surely the design of the laptop is covered by copyright? edward 20:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted version with screenshot; kept other. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:06, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

This image serves no purpose on here and is not used for any article. 216.15.111.243 17:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep immediately. Oh come on! I'm sick of those DR! And I'm sick of anonymous IP coward requests! This picture is a non-pornographic illustration of vagina. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept, well within Commons:Project Scope. Bad faith nomination. Commons is not censored. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 23:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

Not used for any pages, no purpose 216.15.111.243 21:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

No liscense --—Preceding unsigned comment added by SwirlBoy39 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep It is obvious they wanted CC-by-SA 2.0. I vote we keep and just retag it with the properly named template. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- No, cc-sa is a valid license. It's deprecated by Creative Commons but it is a valid license. It imposes a sharealike requirement without attribution. Keep Image is appropriately licensed. -N 23:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept - valid license --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Black_genitalia.jpg

This image serves no purpose on here and is not used for any article. 216.15.111.243 17:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep immediately. Oh come on! I'm sick of those DR! And I'm sick of anonymous IP coward requests! This picture is 1) a non-pornographic illustration of genitalia; 2) a work by artist Peter Klashorst (and if one thinks we already have enough of Klashorst's work, I'd answer that this artist is famous enough so it would be non-neutral to determine which works we would keep and which we would delete). --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept, well within Commons:Project Scope. Bad faith nomination. Commons is not censored. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 23:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Black_genitalia.jpg

Not used in any article, serves no purpose 216.15.111.243 21:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Black_genitalia_2.jpg

This image serves no purpose on here and is not used for any article. 216.15.111.243 17:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep immediately. Oh come on! I'm sick of those DR! And I'm sick of anonymous IP coward requests! This picture is 1) a non-pornographic illustration of genitalia; 2) a work by artist Peter Klashorst (and if one thinks we already have enough of Klashorst's work, I'd answer that this artist is famous enough so it would be non-neutral to determine which works we would keep and which we would delete). --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept, well within Commons:Project Scope. Bad faith nomination. Commons is not censored. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 23:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Black_genitalia_2.jpg

No purpose, not linked to any article. 216.15.111.243 21:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Images of Alexkhandria2k

File:Vulva 01.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 02.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 03.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 04.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 05.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

Considering the fact that these are the only contributions ever by User:Alexkhandria2k, I find the simple assertion that the user holds the copyright to be doubtful, to say the least. Further considering that Commons has more than enough illustratory images of female genitals, I recommend deletion of all listed images. Dorftrottel 17:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any formal reason for this request. Missing the point of aesthetics - permission license is OK, description is OK. It might be educational, taking picture description into account (Asian type, 32 y. old). "More than enough illustratory images" is not a good reason, see how many dogs or cats or... sunsets we have in Commons... Julo 18:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- About the license: My concern is that this user uploaded these five images, then vanished forever. There's no editorial reputation to vouch for that claim of copyright ownership. Dorftrottel 20:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to you that the person who contributed this registered a different name just for these pictures? Most people don't want their name stamped to a picture of their pussy on the internet. --71.191.135.128 06:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No, that did not occur to me. Dit it ever occur to you it would be possible to mail those pictures to another user in good standing, preferably an admin, and ask them to upload it for them? Dorftrottel 20:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Then someone knows. It's traceable. - Rocket000 04:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Traceable?? Also, this way, no one knows, which is no better. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, traceable. The best way to be anonymous is to be anonymous. :) - Rocket000 00:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This way, no one knows, which is no better. Dorftrottel 16:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

In some Wikipedias users are openly encouraged to use sockpuppets for uploading of difficult images of any kind (e. g. in german Wikipedia). Here even EXIF data is intact, what's very untypical for copyright violations. Those EXIFs reveal a camera type that was very common for that period too. So there's no reason for copyright paranoia! And pictures of female genatalia with natural pubes are undoubtedly of encyclopaedical value nowadays. --Hemulen 14:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep AGF here. Other than being the uploader's only contribs, there's nothing here which makes me question the license. - Rocket000 04:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please assume the assumption of good faith. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
  - What? I was talking about me assuming good faith, not telling you to. - Rocket000 00:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
    - Oh. Sorry, I misunderstood. Dorftrottel 16:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep I see no reason to deleted these pictures nor to think there might be a copyright problem (pure speculation) --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 11:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

It's also pure speculation that the license is valid, with no indicator either way. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I prefer the term "assume good faith". We usually take people's word unless there's reason not to. - Rocket000 00:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what I meant. If there's a good reason to assume there might be a problem of trust with that user, well fine. But I see no such reason here. As for the "we have enough genitalia images" argument I think it has no value here since they are quite good quality shots so if we have to make a choice then we'd better delete poorer images. What's more I always find quite interesting to see that such argument is always used for anatomy or erotic pictures and almost never for - let's take some few example - personal pets or souvenir shots of a trip in Paris! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. There is simply no basis on which to base any trust, really. Dorftrottel 16:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you can start a DR for maybe 50% of the pictures on Commons! Have fun! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not start right here? Dorftrottel 17:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh, because it's not policy to assume copyright violation in the absence of evidence.Quelcrime 00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not the way it works. The burden of evidence is with the uploader. Dorftrottel 04:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep There's no evidence these are copyvios. Simply asserting a suspicion with no evidential support is not reason to delete. The burden of proof is on you, if you want to assert copyright violation. It sounds like prudery with 'copyvio' as an excuse.217.44.132.81 00:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep Cite actual grounds for suspicion of copyright violation. I've never heard that images are copyright violations unless the uploader has uploaded a certain minimum number of images. I've only uploaded one.Quelcrime 00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep Perhaps Dorftrottel could sort out the tags on his own uploads before making unfounded accusations against others whose tags are perfectly in order.86.145.1.63 11:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- ?? What are you talking about, brave and mysterious IP? Dorftrottel 04:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep These pictures are of good quality and there's no sign for copyright violation. These picures serve to lift the taboo on female genitals and are perfectly suitable for commons. 212.27.185.253 11:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep I can't see any evidence for copyright violations and I don't share the point of view, that the number of figures related to a certain topic should be limited. --Iwoelbern 13:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Shizhao 14:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Images of Alexkhandria2k

File:Vulva 01.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 02.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 03.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 04.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Vulva 05.jpg (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

Considering the fact that these are the only contributions ever by User:Alexkhandria2k, I find the simple assertion that the user holds the copyright to be doubtful, to say the least. Further considering that Commons has more than enough illustratory images of female genitals, I recommend deletion of all listed images. Dorftrottel 17:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any formal reason for this request. Missing the point of aesthetics - permission license is OK, description is OK. It might be educational, taking picture description into account (Asian type, 32 y. old). "More than enough illustratory images" is not a good reason, see how many dogs or cats or... sunsets we have in Commons... Julo 18:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- About the license: My concern is that this user uploaded these five images, then vanished forever. There's no editorial reputation to vouch for that claim of copyright ownership. Dorftrottel 20:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to you that the person who contributed this registered a different name just for these pictures? Most people don't want their name stamped to a picture of their pussy on the internet. --71.191.135.128 06:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No, that did not occur to me. Dit it ever occur to you it would be possible to mail those pictures to another user in good standing, preferably an admin, and ask them to upload it for them? Dorftrottel 20:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Then someone knows. It's traceable. - Rocket000 04:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Traceable?? Also, this way, no one knows, which is no better. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, traceable. The best way to be anonymous is to be anonymous. :) - Rocket000 00:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This way, no one knows, which is no better. Dorftrottel 16:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

In some Wikipedias users are openly encouraged to use sockpuppets for uploading of difficult images of any kind (e. g. in german Wikipedia). Here even EXIF data is intact, what's very untypical for copyright violations. Those EXIFs reveal a camera type that was very common for that period too. So there's no reason for copyright paranoia! And pictures of female genatalia with natural pubes are undoubtedly of encyclopaedical value nowadays. --Hemulen 14:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep AGF here. Other than being the uploader's only contribs, there's nothing here which makes me question the license. - Rocket000 04:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please assume the assumption of good faith. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
  - What? I was talking about me assuming good faith, not telling you to. - Rocket000 00:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
    - Oh. Sorry, I misunderstood. Dorftrottel 16:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep I see no reason to deleted these pictures nor to think there might be a copyright problem (pure speculation) --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 11:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

It's also pure speculation that the license is valid, with no indicator either way. Dorftrottel 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I prefer the term "assume good faith". We usually take people's word unless there's reason not to. - Rocket000 00:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what I meant. If there's a good reason to assume there might be a problem of trust with that user, well fine. But I see no such reason here. As for the "we have enough genitalia images" argument I think it has no value here since they are quite good quality shots so if we have to make a choice then we'd better delete poorer images. What's more I always find quite interesting to see that such argument is always used for anatomy or erotic pictures and almost never for - let's take some few example - personal pets or souvenir shots of a trip in Paris! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. There is simply no basis on which to base any trust, really. Dorftrottel 16:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you can start a DR for maybe 50% of the pictures on Commons! Have fun! --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not start right here? Dorftrottel 17:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh, because it's not policy to assume copyright violation in the absence of evidence.Quelcrime 00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not the way it works. The burden of evidence is with the uploader. Dorftrottel 04:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep There's no evidence these are copyvios. Simply asserting a suspicion with no evidential support is not reason to delete. The burden of proof is on you, if you want to assert copyright violation. It sounds like prudery with 'copyvio' as an excuse.217.44.132.81 00:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep Cite actual grounds for suspicion of copyright violation. I've never heard that images are copyright violations unless the uploader has uploaded a certain minimum number of images. I've only uploaded one.Quelcrime 00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep Perhaps Dorftrottel could sort out the tags on his own uploads before making unfounded accusations against others whose tags are perfectly in order.86.145.1.63 11:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- ?? What are you talking about, brave and mysterious IP? Dorftrottel 04:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep These pictures are of good quality and there's no sign for copyright violation. These picures serve to lift the taboo on female genitals and are perfectly suitable for commons. 212.27.185.253 11:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep I can't see any evidence for copyright violations and I don't share the point of view, that the number of figures related to a certain topic should be limited. --Iwoelbern 13:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Shizhao 14:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Female_genitalia.JPG

This image serves no purpose on here and is not used for any article. 216.15.111.243 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep immediately. Oh come on! I'm sick of those DR! And I'm sick of anonymous IP coward requests! This picture is a non-pornographic illustration of genitalia. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep Commons is not censored. We do have adequate pictures of this nature but we act as a repository for material across the Foundation. It is not pornographic even if it is "graphic" --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept, well within Commons:Project Scope. Bad faith nomination. Commons is not censored. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 23:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Female_genitalia.JPG

No purpose, not linked to any article. 216.15.111.243 21:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:AllisonCroweLittleLightalbumcover.jpg

Highly unlikely that a non-free album cover is GFDL or CC 'free' SkierRMH 01:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Info: Original page claims to be from owner company. Copy is larger than linked copy. Still suspect w/o OTRS. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Licensing confirmed via OTRS. howcheng {chat} 20:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Huỳnh_Phú_Sổ.jpg

The uploader hasn't proved that its creator has died for 50 years or more because the photo here is derivative work. Vinhtantran 11:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Derivative work (photo of picture).Ahonc (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bazilika_Ostřihom.JPG

Duplicate of Image:Bazilika_Esztergom_Hungary.jpg Villy 10:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep They do appear to be the same shot, but the two image files are not of the same quality. In fact, Image:Bazilika_Ostřihom.JPG is somewhat sharper than Image:Bazilika_Esztergom_Hungary.jpg, which is on the blurry side. Yes, one of them should be deleted, but that one should be Image:Bazilika_Esztergom_Hungary.jpg. Werewombat 22:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Since it was a non-controversial small improvement, I took the liberty to upload the sharper version on the unsharp one, and delete the former. Patrícia ^msg 13:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 3

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:GAL_Gallus_gallus_JMR.jpg

source google, author picasa: looks like copyvio to me — H92 (t · c · no) 00:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete in fact I added {{copyvio}} --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 00:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Copyvio from [4].--Trixt 01:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Elgalloylagallina19.jpg

source picasa, author google, permission google: very suspicious — H92 (t · c · no) 00:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Agree. Taggged with {{copyvio}} --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 00:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Trixt: : Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mack Trucks logo.svg

(file unusable) --Panoha 13:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted,

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 15:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Category:Varaždin castle

replaced with category:Old Town, Varaždin --Suradnik13 14:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Please see categories for discussion --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment OK. Just for information, in croatian we called Stari grad what mean "Old Town". Nobody called that castle in Varaždin "Castle" --Suradnik13 14:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close. Wrong place --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Einstein_patentoffice.jpg

See Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2006/07#Image:Albert_Einstein_Swss_Patent_Office_clerk_1905.jpg. Gabbe 15:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Image says "Do not move this file to Commons before 2013 because until then less than 70 years will have passed since the photographer's death.". Seems simple enough to me. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete after moving back to local wiki(s). Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted before some en-admin deletes the version over there. Lupo 07:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:L_fe513400387c199b37ea2987dba2d6dd.jpg

Out of project scope. Commons is not private photoalbum EugeneZelenko 15:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete it could be used for a user page - but its not. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Res MAY 2006.pdf

Work Resume Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 16:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:2006-2007VOW.pdf

Business ad (outdated) Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 16:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:RADIO WORLD V O ARTICLE 970503.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 16:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:La información Oficial.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 5 sentence Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:COLLABORATION GRID f2006.pdf

Graduate school schedule Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

feel free to delete. Also free to delete: Image:COLLABORATION GRID f2007 revised.pdf & Image:COLLABORATION GRID f2007.pdf Jannone (author)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PSICOLOGIA AERONAUTICA 1.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 2.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 4.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Psicología Aeronáutica 3.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Buchrezension arndt demonen.pdf

Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Juan Pablo Martínez.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Biography Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Calidad del Hormigón.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Medical article Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Deflexión de vigas.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Franklin Franco Pichardo.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 2 paragraph Biography Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Paard-Informatie-Onderzoek.pdf

Business ad for computer mouse Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Luke Thomas Biographical.pdf

Biography Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gil vander Heyden.pdf

8 word Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 17:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Iñaki Larrimbe.pdf

One paragraph Bio Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Biografía artística general.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Biography Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Microsoft Word - CHUSCO.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 1 paragraph Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Microsoft Word -PINCHADO.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 1 paragraph Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Microsoft Word - GUAYABO.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 1 paragraph Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Microsoft Word - ENVOLATADO.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 1 paragraph Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PERFIL-AGUSTIN.06.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Autobiography Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SOPEP Company Policy.pdf

Business ad Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Press Release 1.pdf

Business ad Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:MyBloop_logo.png

Not "text in a general typeface". —LX (talk, contribs) 18:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

This also applies to Image:BloopLoader logo.png. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete both as copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Final trabajo review.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Review about social and economic factors and consequences of the diabetes Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Farmacia-morlan-solares.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Microsoft Word - Tanzima1.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. 1 paragraph Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Size Balanced Tree.pdf

University Thesis Text File Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 18:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per WayneRay --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Artillery_871.jpg

It is very unlikely that the Josef ist the original author, as claimed. It is a scan. If he was the original author, he woud scan the photography. Avron 22:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Obvious copyvio scan from a book. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:JoshKlinghoffer.jpg

COPYRIGHT WITHDRAWN BY OWNER --KezOnTour 21:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy kept. The GFDL is irrevocable. Go fail somewhere else. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 17:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Joe_Clark_head.jpg

A crop from another image deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images. Rob 06:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 22:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ProclamadoresBrasil.jpg

this looks like a recent book, i don't believe that the licence could be free Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 13:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per derivative work. --KveD (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Rama: Copyright violation

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ACTJ_LSCH.jpg

Advertissement for a recent event, most probably not released with a free licence Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 13:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per SPAM and promotional. (For non spanish speakers: it's a religious promotional flyer) Not used in any project. KveD (talk) 03:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Rama: Copyright violation

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Cl_saison_image.png

COM:DW. enough said. ViperSnake151 23:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lycaon 13:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:573px-Fred_and_Ginger_from_the_Front2.jpg

derived work from Image:Fred_and_Ginger_from_the_Front.jpg which was delete because it had no free license at flickr. Kolossos 10:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:John_cassavetes_3.jpg

i'm pretty sure this is a screenshot from rosemary's baby (and check out the user's photostream) 98.210.176.233 10:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete already placed {{speedy}} tag. In effect, it's a capture from Rosemary's baby. --KveD (talk) 03:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Zirland: In category Other speedy deletions; no license

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Akyou.JPG

Derivative work of commercial packaging. EugeneZelenko 15:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 01:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, certainly is. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Baluchitherium.jpg

Not free. Painted in 1923 (see Britannica article and artist died in 1953 (see American Museum of Natural History slide 2540). howcheng {chat} 00:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete no license either. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 00:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Image had been PD-US (license was removed by an IP); second link in nom asserts date of 1923 (i.e. not before 1.1.1923); PD claim does not appear supported. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 03:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 09:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:NoETA.JPG

If image below the red cross was deleted for copyvio, the derivate also must be deleted Theklan 22:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, was the copyvio for the photo or for the "logo"? In the latter case, can a terror organisation legally acquire/own copyright? --08:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The logo was removed due to copyvio, despite the organization is illegal, because the creator didn't left it in PD. If the image below is deleted it can't have non-deleted derivatives. ([5]) -Theklan 18:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

ETA's logo is present in many places of Wikipedia (e.g. ETAlogo.jpg), apart from the articles related to the organisation. The copyright conditions in those pictures specify that it's possible to use it in such sizes. This means that this use is valid as well. Escorial82 17:34 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The logo is in English Wikipedia, but not in the other as it was deleted from commons for copyvio. As you can see in ETAlogo.jpg this image appears as copyrightes, so it can be used on English Wikipedia but not in others, and specially not in commons. -Theklan 00:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete on WP it is being fair use'd - can't do that here. Regardless, I believe that more than enough of the original logo is still in tact that this isn't enough of a derivative work to warrant staying. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 06:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Under fair use on the English Wikipedia, only change is the red cross over the image, but it's still a copyvio. --Kanonkas_(talk) 11:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 09:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ThéodoreDeck_Guebwiller.jpg

Mural's are generally copyright. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 00:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete: No FoP in France per COM:FOP. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 03:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment The same mural can be seen on the official web site of the city of Guebwiller here http://www.ville-guebwiller.fr/visite%20(6).html . Should ask the city about its licensing? Jeriby 20:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Coypright mural. Needs licence from the painter MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Carapils.jpg

Copyrighted symbols, logos --Lycaon 09:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen Category:Beer cans? Rocket000 13:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ohh sh*t ;--). Lycaon 13:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. Honestly, this is one area I'm never quite sure what to do. To me, almost all those are clearly copyvios, however based on apparent precedent it seems they are allowed. I say delete them, but I would love to hear others' opinions. Rocket000 18:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm against deletion. ^^ --Romanceor ^[parlons-en] 13:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted.Clear copyvio of design and text. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Monnaie de Carthage.png

No source, no authorship completed only deletion request --Svens Welt 10:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, lacking source information. Kameraad Pjotr 13:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:IMG 5889.jpg

is the unrotated "duplicate" of Image:Prof eckhard heise 2006.jpg --Túrelio 12:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, duplicate file. Kameraad Pjotr 13:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Map_2007_Security_Council.png

Unused errorous and superseeded map. Both a corrected png version Image:UNSC 2007.png and svg version Image:UN Security Council 2007.svg exists. Lokal _Profil 12:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Kameraad Pjotr 14:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Warsaw_Uprising_-_Karl_Ammunition.jpg

I don't think this image applies to the Licensing. It is unlikely that this was made by a Polish photographer or published for the first time in Poland and simultanously Poland and abroad. There are some images in this category with same problem. Avron 22:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: I accidentally closed this DR. I was being a bit trigger-happy with DelReqHandler.js ;\ Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- What does in mean "unlikely that this was (...) published for the first time in Poland"? Read carefuly {{PD-Polish}}:
  
  ...all photographs by Polish photographers (or published for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad) published without a clear copyright notice before the law was changed on May 23, 1994 are assumed public domain.
  
  It was published in Poland 1994 (source referred); the experienced uploader knows rules and no reason not to trust him. Julo 06:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no proof at all that this image was published for the first time in Poland.

Additionaly they may be PD in Poland, by not in the rest of world. In Germany there is also a freedom of panorama but this images are not allowed on commons.

Don't take me wrong, I want to have this pictures on commons but at the moment I doubt the license is OK.--Avron 10:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You've been given the proof that the facts are as they are. You have any proof that they go another way. Only unproven doubts... And you think that it is enought and honest to make a rumor? Electron 10:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The uploader has to proof the licensing, not me. --Avron 11:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So you've been done. If you have unproven doubts it is you who has to prove their are likely... Electron 08:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

You proof that you have no clou about licensing issues. So learn about this or stop arguing here.--Avron 21:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I live in a free country and nobody have rigth to stop me talking and saying my opinion (even it is uncorfortable to him)... So OK. On the other hand. I'll go your way: I have doubts that you have daubts that I have daubts that you have doubts about the fact the licence is rigth or not. There are two opinion: the first is proven the second it is only unproven doubts... In my opinion it is you who should prove it. It is quite hard to prove that you are not a camel. Even you have proofs and the opponet only doubts. Is it clear? Regards :) Electron 06:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

- Keep As Julo...Electron 07:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Info: I agree with Avron that "it is unlikely that this was made by a Polish photographer", but I assumed that the image was "published for the first time in Poland". There is no way for me to prove that there were no earlier non-Polish printings, and if any are found than I think it would be appropriate to delete the image, but I think you should prove it. There are hundreds of images of German forces (Germans, Ukrainians, Cossacks, Azerbaijanis, etc.) from Warsaw Uprising (see [6] or [7]), but most images on Commons are the few that I can find in book sources. --Jarekt 12:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I know there was a long debate about a similiar case Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Stroop Report but it was clear that the pictures were published in Poland for the first time. In other case Commons:Deletion requests/Image:The Bochnia massacre German-occupied Poland 1939.jpg it was made clear that this image is polish property.

Here this is much more difficult. Some other questionable images like Image:Karl16.jpg don't even show the publication origin. I didn't nominate all of the images, just one, to clarify the status. --Avron 12:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Any {{PD-Polish}} images that do not have proof of publication (or other form of official printing) in Poland should not use that license and likely should not be on Commons. I consider them a separate and different group, which should be discussed separately. --Jarekt 19:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that is enough. PD-Polish can only apply when photo was for the first time published in Poland and not because it was once published in Poland. That is the crucial difference. It can't be this way: someone finds photos in a polish book, uploads it on commons and automaticaly claims it as PD-Polish. --Avron 08:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with your statement above. That is why I am not uploading WWII pictures of Hitler or battle of Stalingrad using {{PD-Polish}}, which I have plenty of in Polish books. I am uploading pictures from Warsaw Uprising and Occupation, since I assumed that people outside of Poland are less interested in those and those pictures were unlikely to be printed for the first time outside of Poland. However if there is any proof of prior printing outside of Poland before the earliest date of publication listed with the image, that would be a good reason for removal. --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Finally I've found this picture in German Federal Archives [8] as "Bild 101I-695-0424-08A" --Avron 10:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

And this is a right way you should go at the beginning. Regards Electron 10:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said before, you don't have a clou about licensing on Commons. Also as I said before, the uploader is responsible for the appropriate licensing, not anyone else. Commons:Licensing is a good place to start on this topic. --Avron 11:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You are right but you don't right, too. What would you say if I declared that you are not an European citizen because I doubt about it. I know that you are probably German but it is not enougt for me... I think that it is a similar situation and in a such situation it is my way to prove my doubts not you. To sum up: You have doubts and you (in the end of all) move your but... and did what be to done on the beginning. BTW: it is very simptomatic that especially Germans have such a strict copy right law about the pictures that were taken during WWII. It is quite strange and say very much for that who remember what Germans did during this time... OK. But law is a law and it is not my buisness what kind of law is now here in Germany... Regards and I wish you a good day :) Electron 12:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Electron, If you are trying to be helpful in this discussion, I think you should stick to facts and not your opinions about other users. --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. I've tried to tell this from the beginning: only facts, please - not undocumented doubts... Regards Electron 06:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Avron, It is interesting that you found this picture in German Federal Archives. A lot of the same WWII pictures you might find it in American, Russian and Polish archives as well. What is significance of your find to this discussion? Does it mean the picture was printed in Germany? --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I know, I'm taking the role of devil's advocate, so I'm not liked ;-) As I said I would like to keep the pictures but I also want to assure that one can trust the PD-Polish to the best of our's knowledge. There are some indications not to trust in this case. Usually commons has strict rules so the licensing should be credible.

To your question, what is the significance of this image in the German Federal Archives:

The author is a certain Mr? Leher of german propaganda troops
The ownership of the nagative is on the German Federal Archives

This proves not much in this case, but the indication is that a polish book of 1994 is unlikely the first publication of this image. Nothing more, nothing less. It's up to the admins, which have a deeper knowledge of licensing, whether to trust PD-Polish or not in this and similar cases.

But what annoys me a bit is the attempt of establishing a reversal of the burden of proof for the licensing, like me had to proof that the image is not copyrighted. That is not the way Commons work.

--Avron 16:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Your role as "devil's advocate" is appreciated, since it might clarify boundaries of which images are acceptable and which are not under this license. The last thing I want to do is to invest a lot of time researching, organizing and documenting a collection of images and to have them all deleted. I also understand your annoyance with burden of proof, but I can not think of a better alternative. If I upload any PD-Polish image of unknown photographer (and it is very rare to see photographer's names in many Polish books) I usually can not guarantee his nationality or that it was not published before in other country. But, if there is high probability that photographer was Polish or that there would be little interest in the picture subject in other countries, than I use PD-Polish and document books I found the image in. I might document multiple books in search for the oldest one (see for example Image:Gesiowka.jpg). I also understand that if prior publishing is found than the image will no longer meets requirements of PD-Polish. This the process I observed being used with PD-Polish and I can not think of better alternative.

As for this particular image it all boils down to probabilities. I was guessing that it was likely published in Poland first since I assumed that there was much more interest in subject of Warsaw Uprising in Poland than in other countries. However, I can see that late publishing of the book (1994) and physical location of the negatives in Germany are a problem. I will let others judge the likelihoods. --Jarekt 19:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Photo taken in August 1944 by a photographer Named Lehrer of the Propagandakompanie der Wehrmacht. German Urheberrecht has clearly not yet expired. Trying to apply PD-Polish is a stretch in such cases. Lupo 14:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Foto 3230ß.gif

Unknown, uncaptioned, microscopic, unused photo completed only deletion request --Svens Welt 11:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

category:Bologna--Paolo345 (talk) 06:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. no source, no date, no description. Yann (talk) 15:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bee_Gees_logo.gif

I've re-opened this discussion, as this image did not previously receive sufficient debate or consideration. Nomination request was "I guess it's protected by copyright" which was implicit its assertion of uncertainty. Please consider the following:

The words "Bee Gees" are, as a phrase, not eligible for copyright protection. No album cover or other work from which this image was allegedly derived was provided; where is evidence that this is not the work of the uploader? I can write, for example, trade names such as "Microsoft" or "The Rolling Stones" in whatever font I choose with no violation; considerations of ineligibly due to being "a simple typeface" don't even come into play without first identifying the work allegedly being copied (i.e. of what image is this a copyvio? Give us a link or other substantive information).
Text is not eligible for copyright. "A simple typeface", the deleting admin's term, is not a legal phrase or definition. The United States Copyright Office identifies "mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring" as ineligible for protection" (emphasis mine) and has been reiterated numerous times in case law, including, for example, Darden v. Peters. The logic therefor is rooted in the concept of "useful articles", as articulated by Title 17. "Mere variations of typographic ornamentation" is very broad wording and, indeed, seemingly counterintuitive in the apparent latitude it provides. However, it is what it is.

The notion that text must take the form of "a simple typeface" to be ineligible for protection is a misconception not supported by statutes or case law (likely caused in part by a hitherto removed, misleading and false disclaimer at Template talk:PD-textlogo). If Commons wants to implement a text policy that is stricter than actual law (e.g. just as en.wiki fair use is stricter than "real life" fair use), that is something we can certainly consider. As things stand now, however, this image has been wrongly deleted. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 15:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

- It is probably derived from this cover: en:Image:Bee Gees Greatest 1979.jpg in en:Bee Gees Greatest. --AVRS (talk) 08:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Keep Clearly not eligible for copyright. -N 01:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete To me this looks like an artwork, admittedly one that depicts words, but an artwork nevertheless. I think a fair bit of creativity from a graphic artist rather than just fancy typesetting went into its creation. Also the Bee Gees are a UK band and the record company responsible for the record mentioned, RSO, is also British. I'm not sure that UK law is quite so liberal as US. --Simonxag (talk) 11:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Seems to have some effort gone into it. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Windows screenshots

~~Image:Jazilla milestone 4.png~~ Cropped out decorations. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 15:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:TuxGuitar Windows.png
Image:7-Zip 4.32 attitude compression rate de.png
Image:7-Zip 4.32 data compression procedure de.png
Image:7-Zip File Manager ES.png
Image:7-Zip Filhanterare.gif
Image:7-Zip screenshot.png
Image:AWB_Username.png (down arrow)
Image:JMulTi_screenshot_VECM_Impulse_Response_Analysis.gif
~~Image:Histogramme_Iguacu_02.png~~ cropped by the uploader down to a trivial 3D border --AVRS 20:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Blender 2.45 screenshot.jpg (Has been cropped since this deletion request, should be fine now.) 85.147.58.212 22:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Inkscape.png
Image:Inkscape-Reglages-Calque-Blanc-Opacité-0500-3D.PNG
Image:Inkscape screenshot.png
Image:Wikipedia rss with mozilla thunderbird.PNG
Image:VirtualDub 1.7.0.png
Image:Virtualdub asf.png
Image:Virtualdub audio codecs.png
Image:Virtualdub audio conversion.png
Image:Virtualdub brooktree tweaker.png
Image:Virtualdub frame rate.png
Image:Virtualdub interleave.png
Image:Virtualdub video codecs.png
Image:Virtualdub video filtering.png
Image:Virtualdubmain.png
Image:Virtualdubmod audio filtering.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs01.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs02.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs03.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs04.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs05.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs06.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs07.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs08.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs09.png
Image:Virtualdubmod prefs10.png
Image:Virtualdubmod streams.png
Image:Virtualdubmod vbr mp3.png
Image:ContribsRollback.JPG Superseded by PNG version with the titlebar cropped out. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 01:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Sodipodi Windows.png
~~Image:Emule-transfer-stats-window 048a.png~~ Cropped out decorations. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 01:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
~~Image:POL eMule search results.gif~~ cropped. odder 12:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC) Still contains scroll bar and buttons, which is the argument for most of these. Rocket000 06:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Emule morpht.PNG
Image:Emule 047a.jpg
Image:Captura Chatzilla (MAG).PNG
Image:Chatzilla channel view.png
Image:Chatzilla query view.png
Image:Chatzilla start.png
Image:Gnucleus - Downloads Screenshot.jpg
Image:Dasherwindows2.png
~~Image:VMware_Workstation_-_Snapshot_Manager.png~~ removed for being a copyvio of VMware and not Windows however. ViperSnake151 18:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-01.png
Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-02.png
~~Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-03.png~~ GIMP'd — Str4nd 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-04.png
Image:メモ帳.JPG
Image:Wordpad.JPG

Windows is a non-free operating system published by Microsoft, and the appearance of its GUI widgets is likewise non-free. Per Commons:Licensing#Screenshots, it appears that the use of non-free widgets such as the Windows title bar in a screenshot may not count as de minimis copying, making the whole image non-free. I'm not an expert at identifying close boxes, as I have never used Windows Vista, but I have difficulty believing that all of these screenshots were taken with Wine. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 23:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep Dialog boxes, buttons, and the like are not copyrighted. In fact, this was Microsoft's position under oath in Apple v. Microsoft. -N 23:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Quoting from Commons:Licensing#Screenshots (my emphasis):
  
  Screenshots are copyrighted if the displayed program or operating system is copyrighted. For a detailed discussion see here.
- In addition, the specific designs of the minimize, maximize, and close boxes are not textual elements. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 23:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  - So Microsoft's sworn statements in Apple v. Microsoft that their look and feel isn't copyrighted shouldn't be binding on them? -N 23:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    - The up arrow to scroll up isn't copyrighted, but the specific image used for an up arrow in Windows may be. Otherwise, Apple would have had 0 leverage when it was sending out cease and desists for unauthorized Aqua clones. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 23:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
In this case, I would have to say 删除 because the Luna theme is not simple enough not to be copyrighted. The specific parts that I am mentioning are the titlebar and the border around the window. 哦，是吗？(O-person) 02:35, 31 December 2007 (GMT)
- So Microsoft has a copyright on the blue spectrum now? -N 02:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  - What a senseless discussion...on the same level you could say, the painter has no rights for his painting, because some other people produced the colors... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.196.72.102 (talk • contribs) at 13:30, 17. Apr 2008 (UTC)

Damian: the Aqua clones copied the whole interface (or "skin")! A screenshot is something different. A commentator on slashdot said about the Aqua and Apple controversy:

There is no issue here. These are not Aqua-inspired graphics, or reminiscent-of-Aqua graphics, or graphics that look sorta like Aqua, these are Apple's graphics, copied and pasted, bit for bit, into a Stardock theme. This is not "look and feel", this is just plagiarism. [..] This is a re-implementation of Aqua on Windows. [..] Taking someone else's work and calling it your own is being a dick. How can anybody reasonably defend this? ([9])

To take a screenshot of a program that incidentally show three window-icons or a scrollbar is on a completely different level. The "down arrow" or the "maximize icon" look quite differently in different versions of Windows or even in different Windows skins. I find it unlikely that they, by themselves, can be be copyright protected. Not everything can be copyrighted.

And how does http://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/publications/copyrightalexmorrisson.htm prove that every part of an operating system is copyrighted?

So I don't see any solid evidence why it should be copyrighted. I think user:N has on the other hand provided evidence of the opposite.

Fred J 02:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with User:O here, but I think most images can be saved by cropping. I have previously interpreted Commons:Licensing#Screenshots such that screenshots should not show titlebars from non-free operating systems. I would regard the rounded design, shadow effects, gradients and colour scheme as used by default in Microsoft Windows versions later than Windows 2000 and Windows XP, taken as a whole (not just "the blue spectrum"), as copyrightable. I would not regard its inclusion as incidental or de minimis, as it generally appears in full resolution without any distortion. I do recognise that it is a borderline case, but as much as I cannot say with certainty that it does infringe, one would be hard-pressed to make a substantiated argument with any reasonable degree of certainty that all courts in applicable jurisdictions would hold these elements to be below the threshold of originality. I don't, however, see a problem with screenshots with the older look of Microsoft Windows or screenshots cropped to exclude the titlebar. I believe we should err on the side of caution to protect the legal integrity of Commons and crop out unnecessary window decorations, and I think that would be a sufficient remedy in most cases to avoid deletion.

In summary:

Keep "Windows classic look" screenshots (e.g. Image:Jazilla milestone 4.png)

Crop all others to exclude Window decorations

Delete those screenshots where this is not possible (such as for MDI applications)

—LX (talk, contribs) 16:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Since in KDE it is possible to select a "Redmond" Skin (i.e. a windows classic look and feel) and since KDE doesn't contain copyrighted images, those screenshot can be kept. In fact a normal user cannot distinguish between the Redmond skin of KDE and the native windows classical L&F. (e.g. Image:Wikipedia rss with mozilla thunderbird.PNG)
--193.206.186.101 15:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, some of those don't even look like Windows. (Image:Virtualdubmain.png) Rocket000 22:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep most,

Delete some. Nearly all of these do not contain non-free material (some do like the ones with Windows icons, and I'm not talking about simple generic geometric shapes like the "close" button or "down" arrow). The classic title bar is not specific to Windows. If it was, practically all free software would be in violate of Microsoft's copyrights, and I don't think that's the case. Rocket000 22:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Specifically, I support deleting Image:Gnucleus - Downloads Screenshot.jpg, Image:Emule morpht.PNG, Image:POL eMule search results.gif, Image:Emule 047a.jpg, Image:7-Zip screenshot.png, Image:7-Zip Filhanterare.gif, Image:7-Zip File Manager ES.png, and Image:Wikipedia rss with mozilla thunderbird.PNG for those who hate Wikipedia's logo being used where it's not needed. The rest seem fine to me except maybe the Vista one. The title bar, scroll arrows, and right-hand buttons are not enough to be a copyvio. Mainly because it's way to generic and Microsoft didn't even design them, but also because I would say text, gradients, and extremely simple geometric non-artistic shapes are PD-ineligible. You might say it's eligible when taken as a whole, but Microsoft and the U.S. court system would disagree[10]. Rocket000 22:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep A Windows classic title bar is not enough to make it copyrighted by Microsoft. Platonides 22:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep most, I think. Copyrightability standards can differ between countries... the discussion linked above is for the UK, but US rules are probably more applicable here. The symbols on the title bar icons are too simple to be copyrighted (and were taken from en:NEXTSTEP anyways), and likewise the WinNT / Win2K stylings are also too simple, I think. I'm less sure of the XP and Vista styles... they are more complex gradients, but if they are autogenerated programmatically, that is actually an argument against copyrightability (no human artistic involvement). They are certainly branding of a sort, maybe trademarkable, but I'm still unsure about copyright. Of course, most individual graphic icons are copyrightable, so screenshots which show task bar icons, the desktop background, program icons, system icons in file listings, etc. would all be copyrightable. Some of the above screenshots have those, and not all can be saved, but some can through cropping. Carl Lindberg 07:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

"but if they are autogenerated programmatically, that is actually an argument against copyrightability": <sarcasm>Yeah, and SVG images are automatically {{PD-ineligible}}.</sarcasm> Gradients in such vector images are also generated programmatically, but the choice of the area in which the gradient is applied, as well as the colors and directions of the gradient, are creative steps. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 15:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Obviously SVG images are not automatically ineligible. A single gradient though, should not be eligible by itself. Drawing a straight line involves choices in placement, angle, and color, but that would not be anywhere close to copyrightable by itself either. If a generic effect can be applied to arbitrary shapes, then simply adding that effect to an uncopyrightable image does not automatically add a copyright, I don't think. Does Adobe get part ownership of a derivative copyright if you use one of its Photoshop effects on one of your images? The XP title bar style seems to be horizontal gradients... is that original enough, or is that just common practice to create a 3D-ish effect? It is probably arguable either way. Simply changing the colors is not enough to add a copyright either, so I'm not sure that enters into it. According to this, Copyrightability depends upon the presence of creative expression in a work, and not upon aesthetic merit, commercial appeal, or symbolic value. From the same document, a combination of a few standard symbols such as a circle, a star, and a triangle, with minor linear or spatial variations is not copyrightable either. It seems to me the design of the title bar falls into that area, but it may be arguable. Obviously, cropping away the title bar is safer, but I'm not comfortable with deleting images solely on that basis either. It may be protectable via trademark or design patent, but copyright, to me, seems borderline at best. Carl Lindberg 17:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

What on earth. Totally unfounded nomination. Keep them all. Among the topmost unfounded listings here are for example Image:Blender 2.45 screenshot.jpg (uses all its own UI elements) and Image:AWB Username.png (does not display a single Windows UI Element). --Ligulem 15:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's founded until COM:DW lists an explicit exemption for de minimis use. The AWB screenshot has a down arrow from a scrollbar, and one might argue that the specific shape of this down arrow comes from the (copyrighted) Windows library. Blender has a non-classic titlebar, or is this titlebar drawn using a custom toolkit in the same way that the titlebar of Office 2007 windows is drawn? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 23:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Keep where the objection is on the basis that there are minor elements of Windows OS in view as part of the free software's screen shot. Where a screen shot includes a piece of Microsoft software (e.g. OS utility or applet, or stand-alone application), then certainly it should be removed from Commons (perhaps to be hosted on a platform that permits fair use images and images with other licenses permitting limited use). I don't see any images in this collection that meet those criteria. Application title bars, scroll bars and drop-down list arrows don't, IMHO, meet such criteria. Webaware ^talk 02:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Rocket000's selection of images have file listings which include file icons, including system and third-party ones, so those could be a problem. Image:Emule-transfer-stats-window 048a.png needs to have the windows task bar cropped off for sure. Carl Lindberg 05:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  - OK, I'll grant that the emule image needs cropping as you say - I had not scrolled down far enough to see the Windows task bar before, sorry! I don't think that the others Rocket000 lists should be deleted, however, as they are not representing the icons as anything more than what their owners intended them to be, and are themselves but a small part of the image (compare to a photograph of a street scene with shop signs, cars with manufacturers' badges, etc.) Webaware ^talk 03:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    - It's interesting that you mention "cars with manufacturers' badges" See this adrants story about Ford Motor claiming copyright on pictures of its cars. (Found via Slashdot) --Damian Yerrick (☎) 19:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
      - Interesting... although it sounds like their claims are solely around trademarks, with nothing to do with copyright. I was not able to find the details of the actual complaint -- just a vague description from someone a couple people removed from the original -- but it's quite possible that they are just claiming that a third-party calendar of all Ford Mustang photos is either trademark dilution or something people may mistakenly assume is a Ford product. Trademarks have to be more vigorously protected, as they are easier to lose. It's also quite possible the lawyers are trying to stretch trademark law to (or beyond) its limits, but without knowing the actual claims it's hard to say either way. As a similar example, the shape of the Empire State Building is trademarked I believe. None of which has anything to do with copyright... you can trademark all kinds of things which would not qualify for copyright. Carl Lindberg 04:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
      - Crikey, it would put the blender amongst the pigeons if some heartless companies took a similar view of, what, 20% of the images here on Commons? At any rate, the image referred to by Crotalus horridus, below, adequately demonstrates my point, FWIW. (oh, and note that Ford have not done as you say - they have requested that Cafe Express "cease and desist" producing images of its trademarks for profit, and Cafe Express have gone hunting through its customers' uploads) Webaware ^talk 09:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
crop Crop the part of the image that is clearly Microsoft to avoid and problems.
Keep screenshots containing the classic (95/98/2K) Windows interface. First of all, the site that has been quoted above is irrelevant since it is based in the United Kingdom and discusses UK law. Copyright law in the United States is different in a variety of ways. I don't think that 16×14 toolbar buttons containing only simple geometric shapes have enough creative aspect to be subject to copyright at all, and even if they are, their use here is incidental. It's no different than the Times Square wide-angle shot that happens to contain some trademarked/copyrighted logo. They are not the primary subject of the picture, so their presence is irrelevant. That said, we could always remove any ambiguity by using Wine to take screenshots and employing a theme that looks similar, but not identical, to the standard Windows theme. Crotalus horridus 23:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Delete / crop XP and Vista titlebars, icons, taskbars; classic taskbars and non-trivial icons. Also, for instance, remove Image:Dasherwindows2.png, if the toolbar settings do not matter or if it is replaced or if it is unused. The other classic stuff can wait for a replacement (or be cropped), icons and the W98 gradiented titlebar being probably the most vulnerable part. --AVRS 20:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Possible solution: What if we use ClearLooks for Windows XP? Windows decorations are replaced by Clearlooks decorations, including buttons and other UI elements. Clearlooks for Linux is GPL theme, and this version was released under GPL too. It would be easier than installing Linux or even Wine. FedericoMP 00:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Doable, but to prevent future misunderstandings, it would be nice to mention ClearLooks in the description of each image that has been corrected in this way. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 14:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep: OS-GUI appearing in a screenshot of a free program is fair use 193.190.253.144 18:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fair use is prohibited on Commons. --AVRS 19:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
  - Why don't you nominate Image:Burger King in London.jpg, Image:Stevejobs Macworld2005.jpg, etc. for deletion then? We have thousands of images that contain some copyrighted items. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjetil r (talk • contribs) 2008-06-03T10:31 (UTC)
    - The first of them has {{trademarked}} for a reason. Screenshots are exact copies. --AVRS 12:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's an argument for moving all such screenshots to your local Wikipedia or Wikibooks, not for keeping them on Commons. As I understand the policy, the test for Commons is whether it's legal to copy the widget images pixel-for-pixel, use the images for widgets in a Free operating system, sell copies of the Free operating system, and market the Free operating system as a direct competitor to the operating system that the images came from. That distinguishes de minimis copying (which appears to be allowed on Commons but has no solid definition as of March 2008) from fair use copying (allowed only on some language editions of some other Wikimedia projects). --Damian Yerrick (☎) 14:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
  - Some free OS's we allow screenshots of have themes that directly mimic XP. Pixel for pixel. And we allow those screenshots. It'd be silly therefore to exclude actual Windows screenshots. -N 20:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

A square with a cross, blue headers and simple ractangulars filled with texts are not copyrightable see, en:Merger doctrine#Copyright and en:Threshold of originality. Software created for Windows using it's widgets is also not automatically copyrighted by Microsoft. What makes the interface unique is the arrangement of the simple elements. So lets Keep the screenshots and crop away trademarked Windows Logos / copyrighted wallpapers, but not grey bars. --Matt 23:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Keep screenshots with classical windows gui elements (buttons, title bars, scrollbars, panels, etc.) --Ilya K 11:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep all of them. They are obviously for some sort of tutorial for people who use Windows, replacing them with Linux pictures would be counter productive Bitplane 17:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- What does make you think they are for a tutorial? --AVRS 20:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep, there is little or no difference between these screenshots and images like Image:Burger King in London.jpg, Image:Stevejobs Macworld2005.jpg, etc. --Kjetil_r 10:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 2008

Comment Ok People. Lets figure this out and be done with it already! --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment I added Image:VMware_Workstation_-_Snapshot_Manager.png to the list, I hope that is the right procedure. :s — H92 (t · c · no) 15:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

VMWare is unfree altogether, and such screenshots are subject to speedy deletion. This deletion request is about screenshots of free software containing window decorations and other elements of proprietary software. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the information. I had no idea of what VMWare was before I took a look on en.wiki right now, and I now see that it’s proprietary software. If i did know that I would right away mark it as speedy. The only thing I did know was that the Vista decoration is not free. ;) Sorry! — H92 (t · c · no) 22:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I added Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-03.png: Firefox is free. — H92 (t · c · no) 14:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

+3 more — H92 (t · c · no) 14:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I've cropped out the Vista specific stuff from Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-03.png and Image:Wikiuutiset-RSS-Syöte-FF3-04.png. Firefox UI is not copyrighted for Microsoft, FYI. --AtteL 15:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep... --AtteL 15:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I added Image:メモ帳.JPG (a screenshot of Notepad) and Image:Wordpad.JPG. --125.197.253.83 20:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted the obvious problem images. Left the others for further discussion.

This DR cannot be dealt with properly on the basis of the policies we currently have. There is a need to set out some general principles, agree them, and apply them. Before we can deal with difficult questions like "can Windows minimize/maximize icons be allowed?", we ought to discuss the whole concept of de minimis generally. I propose the following:

1. Write a de minimis proposal, not specifically screenshot-related. I have done this at Commons:De minimis.
2. Discuss and agree that page
3. Apply whatever principles are agreed to screenshots, and draft some easy-to-apply rules that we can use for screenshots
4. Discuss and agree
5. Re-open this DR as needed, and apply those rules.

Please come over to Commons talk:De minimis and discuss. --MichaelMaggs 15:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tamcam.jpg

You cannot be sure that the artist is the one who gave it to ibilio, so this image is likely copyright violating. Vinhtantran 10:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Who is the author of this painting? Date of publication? It might be PD-Art if it is old enough. Yann (talk) 15:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. The author is on the image description: Yên Hòa. I couldn't find anything about the artist. However, the site's conditions to submit these images include "Please note however that according to sunsite.unc.edu rules, all contributions should either belong to the public domain, or have a copyright allowing distribution." [11] So which one is it here? We don't know. Unless we are sure the image is PD due to age, we cannot host this file. Patrícia ^msg 14:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 4

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Marcel_Proust.jpg

Copyivo, see here Gabbe 09:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Lupo: copyvio; see COM:L

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Miley-cyrus060807.jpg

Unless her neck is growing out of her chest, this is a photoshop job in an unflattering pose. --190.4.72.45 12:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deleted as a copyvio. The provided deletion rationale wasn't sufficient for an image to be deleted. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:North_America_satellite_orthographic.jpg

miami 83.4.112.119 14:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Bad faith deletion request. Speedy keep. --Brynn 17:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy kept, junk request Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 17:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ángel Émbil Ecenarro.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Text file article should be on es wikipedia (spanish) Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 15:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted Julo 19:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Penis_0016.JPG

Also:

Image:Penis 0017.JPG (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

Very poor quality photo. Brynn 16:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete useless. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 16:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Frankly it is so bad I'd delete it speedily personally --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete speedily. It can’t get much worse. — H92 (t · c · no) 18:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment I've added another, very similar one to the nomination. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 20:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted, both, nothing there.

best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} ∇ 20:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:JamieBamber.jpg

Keep The other copy you point to says "Chad took this great photo of me..." implying that Chad Forbes (theforbzez) is the actual photographer and therefore copyright holder, even if the other flickr user uploaded it first. So the license looks correct. --dave pape 17:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You're correct - I didn't make the connection. Someone please close this nom, thanks. Kelly 19:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Edward_James_Olmos_Sept_06_crop.jpg

Keep Same reason as Commons:Deletion requests/Image:JamieBamber.jpg. --dave pape 17:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You're correct - I didn't make the connection. Someone please close this nom, thanks. Kelly 19:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Budapeshta fera ponto.jpg

Possibly unfree content. Uploader in the original Esperanto file notoriously uploaded pictures taken from the web and put the GFDL tag on them. They are currently being deleted off of Esperanto as unfree content. --Yekrats 20:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 22:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HeilsbergKirche.jpg

non-commercial use only, no derivative works allowed restrictions Jarekt 20:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SchlossanlageHeilsberg.jpg

non-commercial use only, no derivative works allowed restrictions Jarekt 21:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HeilsbergEvKirche.jpg

non-commercial use only, no derivative works allowed restrictions Jarekt 21:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Beijing Office for Women's Production and Education.jpg

Is used at en:Prostitution in the People's Republic of China where its description reads "A prostitution "reeducation center" at a former brothel in Beijing, 1949." So the author cannot have died 70 years ago, which is what the PD-Art tag requires. If someone can justify this being PD for some other reason then fine. Otherwise it has to go. Could the deleter please consider fair use on the English Wikipedia? --Simonxag 11:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I changed license to {{PD-China}}. Keep. -N 00:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep I withdraw my nomination. --Simonxag 10:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 10:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Emms.jpg

Permission "for use on Wikipedia only" is not free enough for Commons. See Commons:Licensing. -- Kam Solusar 12:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Speedy if no changes. Vinhtantran 13:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Not commons friendly. Deleted. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Golden_Retriever_Swedish_winter.jpg

"You are allowed to use this photograph only in articles in which Golden retriever is mentioned and on Wikipedia only." is not free enough for Commons. See Commons:Licensing. -- Kam Solusar 12:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Not free. Vinhtantran 13:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gmilogo.gif

"Permission to use for Wikipedia only." is not free enough for Commons, see Commons:Licensing. And there's no proof that the copyright holder agreed to release the image under the terms of the GFDL. -- Kam Solusar 12:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Eva-vdm.jpg

"may be used in Wikipedia only" is not free enough for Commons, see Commons:Licensing. -- Kam Solusar 12:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Not commons friendly. Deleted. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Plexus_Online_Logo.GIF

"Permission from author for use on Wikipedia only" is not free enough for Commons, see Commons:Licensing. -- Kam Solusar 12:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ava_Gardner.jpg

Flickrwashing. Nothing but copyvios on that Flickr account. Lupo 09:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, 1952 photo by Virgil Apger, MGM's promotional photographer 1929-1969. Apger took photos of stars like Clark Gable, Lana Turner, Esther Williams, Stanwyck and magazine covers for "Look", "Life" and "Photoplay". Thuresson 00:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Thuresson: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Ava Gardner.jpg

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:USA_Iran.jpg

Not in COM:SCOPE self-created artwork without educational purpose, not used Avron 14:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I could see this being useful on something like say Wikinews. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept per ShakataGaNai. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Paspoort_NL.jpg

Paspoort is auteursrechtelijk beschermd copyvio Sterkebaktalk 17:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep pd-ineligible. -N 00:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep There's no creative work, just this picture and plain text. Dantadd✉ 01:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep --Suradnik13 07:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep --Orlovic (talk) 09:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:F07.Domme.0014.JPG

Derivative works ...Forrester 18:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom — H92 (t · c · no) 18:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:RBMK.Reactor.jpg

(User TZV is also known in german wikipedia. Im sure he was never in this nuclear power plant. Otherwise he has taken the photo without a permission of the operators. So somebody else has taken this foto.) --K4ktus 20:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep in lieu of any evidence supporting the implausibility of somebody visiting a nuclear reactor. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 21:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment Looking at his uploads at the German Wikipedia, there were quite a few deletions because of obvious copyvios ([12], [13], [14], [15] etc.) and/or missing permissions - most of them images of power plants. And note that on his userpage on Commons, he identifies himself as "Howert Gales from Beaver Valley, USA.", while his userpage on the German Wikipedia states a completely different name and country (the German user is editing many power plant articles, so the chances that these two users are completely different people in real-life is kinda slim). --Kam Solusar 22:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment you dont get a permission to take fotos in the building as a private Person. the photo is non-free in my opinion. --K4ktus 08:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment An example: [16]--K4ktus 09:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep I agree with Lewis Collard. --Jacopo Werther 09:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. --- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ortszentrum.jpg

Deleted at de.wikipedia; no licence.... ...Forrester 17:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete. I don't know if this is the same image as the deleted one on the German WP, which was deleted in 2004 (can't see the deleted image, was this before the ability to restore deleted images was introduced?). But it lacks information about author and source as well as a license. --Kam Solusar 22:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Info: Tagged with {{nld}} for the license.--ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Siebrand: In category Unknown as of 5 June 2008; no license

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Parque_industrial.JPG

Uh huh, sure this is own work...sure... -N 23:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BeechmontEntrance.JPG

Would be PD-old-100 - but its made by a company. CopyVio? ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Additionally:
File:BeechmontLake.JPG (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:BeechmontLake.JPG (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

--ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe you also meant to include Image:BeechmontDrive.JPG in the above list.

Keep. U.S. works published in 1908/1909 - {{PD-US}}. --dave pape 18:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I endorse deletion of all of these images, plus any other images uploaded by this user. There is no documentation (other than the user's assertion) of the actual age of any of these images, which are similar in subject matter and other characteristics to numerous copy-vio images uploaded or flickr-washed (often repeatedly) by a now-banned English-language Wikipedia user and sockpuppets (see [17]). I believe this user to be a new sockpuppet of Jvolkblum. For examples of past problematic Commons activity, also see the following ongoing and completed discussions: Flickr images by Mr.Scholastic, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Attention#Sockpuppeter, Image:BrewsterSchoolhouse.jpg, and PremiumPoint (1).jpg. --Orlady 12:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Additionally another image from a related sock: --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
File:TrinityStPaulsNewRochelle0001.JPG (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

Delete. There is no date on the images to independently verify the age of the images, in the past Jvolkblum has made up dates when they did not know the actual date. BlueAzure 22:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep. We have two issues here.

First, the dating of the postcards. I can say with almost complete certainty that BeechmontEntrance.JPG and BeechmontLake.JPG, at the very least, are dated accurately. The false colouring (a very time-consuming thing to do that few would bother with after colour film went mass-market) and grain is fully consistent with a postcard of this age. Yes, we don't have any actual documentation on this, but in many cases we only have the user's word for it and we don't go on crusades to delete them all ("was this really published in this book?" "does he have independent witnesses willing to state in writing that she did take this with her own camera?"). Which brings us to the second issue:

Second, can we trust this user not to be lying about it? I say we can. Certainly, we should not throw around accusations of sockpuppeteering without convincing evidence. Our nominee said they are "similar in subject matter and other characteristics" to the deleted, well, this is a giant WTF. They are taken from different media, depicting different places in different eras. How our nominee managed to find any similarity other than "they weren't taken yesterday and they all have trees in them" is way beyond me.

TL;DR paranoia is not a substitute for evidence. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: I just noticed this user was blocked. I don't know about what evidence Herby had that this was multiple account abuse; I don't think there was ever enough evidence here to even justify a checkuser in the first place. But whatever. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The images which are clearly early 20th century US postcards I have retagged and changed the info from the false PD-self claim to PD-US. This took care of the images except for Image:BeechmontDrive.JPG which did not match the other postcards (and may or may not be old-- could be a modern pic with false b&w photoshop effect) which I deleted.

Closed; most kept with retagging; one deleted per above. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gilda_Gray_2.jpg

Flickrwashing. Lupo 09:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted; flickr uploader clearly not creator of image, false license. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ahmed_al-Khatib.jpg

en.wp page lists this as possibly non-free. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, taken while in office (1970 - 1971) and thus Public Domain under Syrian copyright law. Kameraad Pjotr 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:LightshipNantucket.jpg

There's no information about the author or original source of this image on the source website. No proof is given that this is indeed the work of the United States Coast Guard. -- Kam Solusar 12:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, no source/author information. Kameraad Pjotr 14:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Norbert_Bude.jpg

Photo from the press office of a German town. Obviously not "part of a statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment", so {{PD-GermanGov}} does not apply. -- Kam Solusar 13:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, PD-GermanGov does not apply. Kameraad Pjotr 14:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Luxor,_West_Bank,_home_of_Howard_Carter,_Egypt,_Oct_2004.jpg

It is not the house of Howard Carter which is at the foot of this mountain! 82.93.105.143 16:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Misnamed yes, but the description says otherwise. Perhaps a rename is in order, but not a deletion. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, but renamed. Kameraad Pjotr 14:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:USS_New_York_City_(SSN-696).jpg

Picture courtesy of Gen Dynamics Electric Boat Div, see http://www.defenseimagery.mil/assetDetails.action?guid=df1479d45e9c9efd5b66eaa80b2174d4b1d5d1b6. So not US-Mil-PD schlendrian •λ• 15:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So an EB (electric boat) employee goes out on the initial testing of sub (in 1982) and takes the picture under contract...taking a picture of a military operation for the military, and then gives the photo to the military. So what makes you think the military doesn't own this photo? Did you read the Terms of Use of the website? -N 10:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81) aerial stern view.jpg, where Lupo confirms the opinion. Also, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000101----000-.html says A “work of the United States Government” is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties. And an employee of EB is not a employee of the United States Government, I believe. Thats the way I as a non-lawyer would put it --schlendrian •λ• 10:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Just saw en:Copyright status of work by the U.S. government#Works produced by contractors, where Wikipedia clamis, that works produced by contractors under government contracts (or submitted in anticipation of such contracts) are protected and restricted under U.S. copyright law. --schlendrian •λ• 11:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Indeed contractor's works are not "U.S. government works". See en:WP:PD#U.S. government works. Lupo 14:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sky Jerusalem South-7BC-11-12.gif

The origination software's terms and conditions include "you must not modify it" and "Any commercial use is however prohibited". No indication that screenshots of the program (derivatives) would have alternative licensing. Wiki does not allow images with "no derivatives" and/or "no commercial use" provisions. --ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 18:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. That seems to refer to the program itself. When you download and run the installer for V2.76 from 2004 (the latest version, bar a minor patch in 2008), the terms and conditions displayed read as "Cartes du Ciel" is a freeware. You can freely install and use any number of copies for your personal or public usage and publish the result as you want. You are sole responsible to use this software which is deliver to you as is and without any warranty. You are authorized to redistribute this software on any support under the restriction that you must not modify it, you include all the documentation files and you not charge a price superior to the support itself. Any commercial distribution is however prohibited without a specific authorization. (Emphasis mine.) Lupo 14:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Encabezado_cuenca_J.jpg

The botto of the page this comes from is marked "Copyleft 2005" but if you go to the home page you see the license is cc-by-nc-sa 2.5, not free enough for Commons. -N 23:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So try to give it the correct form and upload it--Juan Flores A. 23:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Would the bottom of that specific page supersede the homepage? There is nothing to stop them from having more than one license on a website. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. "Copyleft" is not a license, it's a type of license, of which CC-BY-NC-SA is one. Lupo 14:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Festival_de_todas_las_ares_Víctor_Jara.JPG

cambio Edosolis 14:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep "Change" ? Doesnt make sense.

Kept. no valid reason for deletion Yann (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Stub.jpg

The image was tagged for deletion by the uploader on 5 September 2005 without completing the deletion request. The reason given follows. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

there's another pictures with this name in the German speaking WP edition. This needs to be renamed (I'll do it).

Mattes 22:44, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

This picture can be deleted and since the licence tag and source is missing, it is redundant. Mattes 11:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Deleted. Yann 23:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Stub.jpg

Very questionable license. If Robe is the author, why this small size? In any case, image is unused. Avron 00:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep But may be very useful in the future. I see nothing wrong if we are talking about the licence... Electron 07:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted (Collard: "recreation of deleted material") Forrester [[ hate+love letters ]] 17:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] WikiProject Canada

There is a tag on a newly created article on commons WikiProject Canada. This is not a gallery, so the tag named This gallery has been requested for deletion is irrelevant and does not make sense at all! The gallery is at Canada. This is a wikiproject similar to these commons definition of wikiprojects and Commons category Wiki Projects . I believe this tag is in error and should be removed. This commons wikiproject is a child of the english wikipedia wikiproject which is trying to resolve image controversy from there. Did add some media to try to help the wikiproject out. Kind Regards. SriMesh | talk 02:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete First off, it was nominated by a bot. Don't take that personally. Otherwise, Commons != Wikipedia. Leave the "WikiProjects" on wikipedia. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Kill it with fire. Let's try not to turn into the other wiki, guys. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So how do we create an area to discuss images relating to Canada? Your help here is appreciated, we don't want to stumble about a different space, but maybe we do need a clue :) Franamax 02:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There are already Wiki Projects on commons, it just give a starting point for users who want to help out in a narrowed down area, as the help page on commons is very vast and covers a large area of media. This WP aims at improving commons in many ways. SriMesh | talk 02:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

*deep breath* Okay, knee-jerk reactions aside, here's what I really think. A WikiProject is necessary and useful when other communication channels are not sufficient; e.g. if there is a real and genuine need for centralised discussion of a matter, or when discussion of said matter threatens to drown out other discussions in other channels (VP and friends). I could see how this would be necessary for articles on Wikipedia (though I wonder if they're worthwhile on balance, given the instruction creep and drama that come with them), but really, how useful is it for a media repository? Is there really much to discuss? Are the existing channels really so broken for this purpose that we have to establish new ones (and balkanise the community in the process of doing so)? I say no, and let's not enact solutions to problems that don't exist yet. But I'm open to argument here. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, if this does get kept, move it into Commons space; mainspace is for galleries. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Boricuaeddie has already performed the move to commons space. Thank you. New title is Commons:WikiProject Canada SriMesh | talk 02:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You didn't move it... You did a copy paste. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Page moved properly. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - While there are certain niches (chem diagrams is the first one I can think of) which require coordination and centralized discussion, this is not one of them (though it hurts my pride as a Canadian to say so). There is just no reason I can see to have this. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 03:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep I think theme-based co-ordination is useful. For example, my proposed changes at Template talk:PD-Canada never really got much attention -- if there was a noticeboard for a Canadian project, then I think things like this could get the attention of those who are interested, without spamming the Pump or commons-l (conversely, people are more likely to monitor a thematic noticeboard than these massive, general areas). --Padraic 13:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete There is absolutely no reason for this. It will just make messes (like all the cross-namespace redirects I'm cleaning up) and take away valuable time from contributers. I've seen what some WikiProjects do. Not much. More time is spent on organizing, recruiting members, and making cute little templates, than any real work. Centralized collaboration's not needed. If you really want to benefit the project, just go to work. Please don't start this crap here. Rocket000 18:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't really want to get into a long discussion, but I don't really think it's the wiki way to start assessing what is and isn't worthwhile work. Obviously we all have our own ideas of what's valuable and what's not -- the genius of Wiki(m|p)edia is that it lets everybody spend their time on their own priorities. It's ridiculous to think that if someone was going to spend time on a project template, and it gets deleted, they will necessarily work the exact amount of time on something else that is "worthy". Wiki-time and wiki-interests are not fungible. --Padraic 18:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. --- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Images in Category:Murals in Ludington, Michigan

Apparent copyright violation by all images in Category:Murals in Ludington, Michigan. Freedom of panorama in the United States extends only to architectural works, not to works of public art such as murals or statuary, even if installed permanently in a public place. Therefore these images are subject to the original copyrights on the murals themselves. This would not be an issue if {{PD-old}} or {{PD-US}} applied, but no evidence is presented regarding the date of authorship or identity and date of death of the author. --Werewombat 20:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. These cannot be kept without a release from the painter in each case. Without it, they infringe the painter's copyright. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

This image serves no purpose on here and is not used for any article. 216.15.111.243 17:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep immediately. Oh come on! I'm sick of those DR! And I'm sick of anonymous IP coward requests! This picture is a non-pornographic illustration of vagina. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept, well within Commons:Project Scope. Bad faith nomination. Commons is not censored. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 23:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

Not used for any pages, no purpose 216.15.111.243 21:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin close - abusive DR's --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vagina.JPG

No liscense --—Preceding unsigned comment added by SwirlBoy39 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep It is obvious they wanted CC-by-SA 2.0. I vote we keep and just retag it with the properly named template. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 23:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- No, cc-sa is a valid license. It's deprecated by Creative Commons but it is a valid license. It imposes a sharealike requirement without attribution. Keep Image is appropriately licensed. -N 23:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept - valid license --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mason_Raymond.jpg

Bad Quality, unusable in any Wikimedia project Xgeorg 06:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Please also delete the following ones (same reason):

Image:Alex Burrows.jpg
Image:Matt Cooke.jpg
Image:Spencer machacek2.jpg --Xgeorg 06:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Granted, the quality isn't ideal, but for use in their respective articles, the image is shrunk to a degree that it is not as evident. With the exception of Cooke, these images are presently the only ones available to represent the three players. In this sense, I believe that the pictures enhance the articles they complement rather than compromise. However, I understand the opposing argument and would respect deletion. Orlandkurtenbach 10:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. I've seen worse... and some are in use, meaning they can be useful. Patrícia ^msg 14:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 5

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SLCWestlandsSign.jpg

Derivative work. The copyright of the design photographed is most likely held by Sarah Lawrence College, which is not the uploader. BlueAzure 01:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 04:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fourtf.jpg

Non-free music video clip see caption for this image in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Four_to_the_Floor_(Starsailor_song)&oldid=216307375 --Angusmclellan 19:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ULA.JPG

University logo Kimse 07:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by ABF: copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Briancook.jpg

This is not an original photo by the Flickr uploader, but a crop of a news photo found here: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-071203 Ytoyoda 12:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete (speedily) as copyvio. And a good lesson learned for a certain new Flickr reviewer >.< --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 14:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Howcheng: Copyright violation

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mauriceevans.jpg

Like Image:Briancook.jpg, appears to be a crop of a copyrighted photo. Too small to be much of use anyway. Ytoyoda 12:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 15:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Spacebirdy: Copyright violation

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Logo_SOS_pechhulp.jpg

Invalid file. Most likely copyrighted logo. EugeneZelenko 15:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. copyvio ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Smetterl_2.JPG

Wrong name. Right one: Image:Schmetterl_2.JPG Atlan da Gonozal 16:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Zirland: Dupe of Image:Schmetterl 2.JPG

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:コカコーラロゴ7110009.jpg

Possible copyright violation Chech Explorer 17:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. by rama ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Hall.jpg

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Hall.jpg

Copyright violation. No fair-use on Commons. Chech Explorer 17:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Again.... --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 18:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Miguel_Lopez.gif

Out of scope - the information on this image can be represented in another way Chech Explorer 17:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 17:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Voetnoten.png

Out of Scope, it is an image showing a (meanwhile solved) problem with a local template on the dutch wikipedia --Wimmel 18:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Goodsouls.jpg

A still image from a music video. No evidence given that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fourtf2.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bornagain.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Thistimestar.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Alcoholic.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lullaby.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Poor_misguided.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Silenceeasy.jpg

Still from music video. No evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Angusmclellan 19:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 20:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Megan.JPG

Looks like a screenshot Kimse 23:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Megan_follows.JPG

Looks like a screenshot Kimse 23:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Statue_of_Colonel_Thomas_Cass,_Commander_of_the_Ninth_Regiment_Massachusetts_Volunteers.JPG

Who is sculptor since USA doesn't have Commons:Freedom of panorama for sculptures? EugeneZelenko 15:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The sculptor was Thomas E Brooks. The statue was unveiled on 21 September 1899 according to the New York Times. According to Wikipedia, the sculptor died in 1919. I think this means the copyright on the work, if it existed, expired in 1989.

Kept. Sculptor was Richard Edwin Brooks. In the future, please categorize your files and please do mention the sculptor and date the statue up front. Lupo 06:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Will do, thanks for the advise!

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Articaine.png

Image dosn't match the structural formula IngerAlHaosului 09:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean, exactly? It matches the structure at en:Articaine.

Ben 11:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

One of the is incorrect then, because the wikipedia version has a extra CH₃.So wikipedia has OCH₃ (see upper right corner) and commons has just a O (see lower left corner). I am not a chemist so i don't know with one is correct.

No, they're both the same. -CH₃ is the same as the end of a line. See en:Skeletal formula.

Ben 12:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Structure is correct, and high-resolution to boot :) By the way, IngerAlHaosului, you can tag chemical structures that appear to be incorrect with {{disputed chem}} instead of listing them for deletion. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, I don't think there's a problem (the uploader removed the {{delete}} tag as well, so I'm thinking he doesn't see one either). If there was one, this is something that should be fixed, rather than nominating for deletion. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Salvador_Dali-Maldoror-1942.jpg

Artwork by en:Salvador Dali, who died in 1989. It's not in the public domain and the owner can't release it as GFDL as he is not the copyright holder. -- Kam Solusar 12:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:LetrèshonorablePierreElliottTrudeau_.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images. (note: there was an error in my first nomination, so I'm re-doing it. Sorry for repetition) Rob 21:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:L_0a113592a292d1e0008978627625eb2a.jpg

Personal photos. Out of scope. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Eiffeltowernightsouth.JPG

Pictures of the lighted Eiffel Tower are considered copyrighted in France. -N 16:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete I believe that's correct. Silly as it is to copyright the lighting on a building, it is copyrighted under French law. Werewombat 14:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Silly, yes, but also the law :( – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:LeftyStatue.jpg

Freedom of Panorama in the USA doesn't apply to statues or sculptures. So, if this statue is under copyright (it's a recent statue, so I think it is) it should be deleted per derivative work / copyright violation according to US law 17 USC 102(a)(8). -- KveD (talk) 20:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 20:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Weissmann_Wedekind1.jpg

uploaded by known copyvio-creator, no source (author + death) abf /talk to me/ 12:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Siebrand: In category Unknown as of 5 June 2008; no source

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Scorpion_bowl_iran.jpg

looks like a scan from a book, not an original photo. see the halftoning (?) in the background gray 98.210.176.233 04:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Yup, looks like a scan to me too. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Conceicaodapraia028.jpg

Mass del. Many suspect images, many look like scans from old work. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 05:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

File:Conceicaodapraia026.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia024.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia023.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia021.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia020.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia017.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia016.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia014.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia012.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia010.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia008.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia006.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia004.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)
File:Conceicaodapraia002.jpg‎ (edit · last · + · history · watch · unwatch · check usage · find cats · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Martin_Škrtel_&_Rafa.jpg

Image has been deleted from Flickr, presumably as it is obviously not a free image. PeeJay 14:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Copyvio. Original source is here. Carl Lindberg 01:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted per above. Note: Flickr user jamesmughal seems to have no shortage of false license copyviols. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Waldsteinhaus_nach_Restauration.jpg

PD-old not assured.Code·is·poetry 23:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

deleted, --ALE! ¿…? 12:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Z-nocu002_2004.jpg

Original uploader on en-wiki is serial copyvio offender, see w:en:User talk:Bg007. Likely copyvio. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Also:

Image:Rue Knez Mihajlova Belgrade.jpg

Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I deleted Image:Rue Knez Mihajlova Belgrade.jpg as it was RM'd from en.wp as copyvio. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 08:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lupo 14:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Javier_Loppez.jpg

and Image:Javierloppez.jpg. Most likely copyvio. EugeneZelenko 15:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete By the watermark, the photographer is Damian Benetucci. The camera metadata matches other photos available on his website, so apparently he keeps the EXIF data with photos he distributes. I can't find this exact photo there, but it is on Javier Loppez' myspace page. We would probably need a permission email sent to OTRS from the photographer (or Loppez, if he owns coypright by contract); otherwise this seems like a pretty clear copyvio. Carl Lindberg 01:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lupo 14:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Second Battle of Falkirk.jpg

This is an image of a painting by Lionel Edwards. He died in 1966 (english wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_Edwards). This image doesn't satisfy copyright requirements --Celtus 23:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Where can we verify that this work is by that artist? --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about a web reference, but the ref i used to find the illustrator was: Harrington, Peter. Culloden 1746, The Highland Clan's Last Charge, Campaign series #12. Osprey Publishing. p. 20. ISBN 1 85532 158 0. It gives this as part of the caption: "'The Battle of Falkirk' (17 January 1746) by Lionel Edwards." If you google "Lionel Edwards" you can see that his works mainly deal with horses. Also, i think you can see a similarity in his paintings found on the web with this one. So far i can't find you an easy web ref to say that this image was his though.--Celtus 07:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lupo 14:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Luis_Echeverria_Alvarez.jpg

No source, en.wiki copy mistakenly claims that "Public domain This file is in the public domain, because Official picture of the President of Mexico" ˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep It appears to be PD-Mex. Evrik 18:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Why? ˉ^anetode╦╩ 22:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete This is NOT in the PD. Official portraits of the Mexican presidents are not in the PD. For a brief period of time, the Fox administration allowed journalists to use pictures of his own events, ceremonies, etc. under a PD-license, but those were pictures located exclusively in a particular server: fuente.presidencia.gob.mx. It's quite clear in the template. Esteban Zissou (talk) 12:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Cirt (talk) 05:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Rivers.jpg

I was wondering how best to handle this when doing Flickr review, but this appears to be a TV cap, and the outfit he is wearing is the same as [18] and [19], which makes this a probable copyvio. jonny-m t ^{en me!} 14:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Cirt (talk) 05:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Susan.jpg

This is a renomination due to the diversity of comments at the undeletion request (and perhaps above as well). Please note that I do not care about the fate of this image. --O (谈 • висчвын) 00:40, 05 June 2008 (GMT)

Hooray! Here we go again! Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete The model has not provided any permission to OTRS per Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. There can be no question that this is a private place, and her consent cannot be assumed. Don't bother with the usual argument that "she gave permission for the photo as she knew it was being taken": that's not the point. The point is whether she gave consent for the image to be publicly released under cc-by-sa-2.0 and posted here. Where is the evidence for that? --MichaelMaggs 05:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep we refused Ribi's DR about Klashorst's pictures as for the "privacy" argument. So I wonder if that rule makes sense! Plus it had been posted on Flickr so I would assume that she gave her consent to be published there, so why not here? The rest is no subject of discussion: even if the picture is not artistic, there's no reason to delete this "erotic" nude and not all the other nudes we have. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 06:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, it is not good rely on the precedent of one wrong decision to make another. The requirement for consent in such cases is clear from Commons:Photographs of identifiable people, and we have no evidence at all that she consented either to the publication under cc-by-sa-2.0 or to the uploading here or to Flikr. --MichaelMaggs 06:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete That is too rude to be on here. Tharnton345 06:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not a valid reason. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 07:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete No model release. Lupo 07:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

YEP, that seems to be fair. Who has an fickr-adult-account to ask her for the permission? Mutter Erde 07:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Do you really think she didn't gave her consent? On her Flickr profile, there's this link (caution, porn and erotic content). So? Isn't it possible sometimes to assume good faith about the consent? It's actually because of an equivalent reason that we kept Klashorst's pictures even if some look private: because he's a known artist/photographer so we assumed that he asked consent from his models. Well, since there's a website of this lady, I think we may assume that she gave consent. A bit like Image:Keeani Lei 6.jpg, which is a photograph of a porn actress on a bed (intimacy, right?) --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 08:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have no flickr-ID. But if this permission is necessary to end this discussion, so give her a note. She might be interested too, what some young guys are thinking about an "old" woman. @ Susan: For me, you are looking very good. And I love your pose. Greetings from good old Germany. Mutter Erde 10:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with her age; quit raising this red herring. As Rama put it, "the photograph is technically naive and crude [and] the model assumes a vulgar position akin to pornographic clichés [...] I see very well why we would distinguish between the numerous nudes we have in store and this one." With that said, if Mutter Erde wants to keep this around so badly (and the crusade he's gone on to keep this is quite startling; one can only presume he needs a little "happy time" every now and then and Commons is the only site with "MILF" pictures that gets past parental filtering ;)), then

Keep it. If only because I want to see this discussion killed for good. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 10:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Our western world gets elder and elder and on the other hand the male part is more and more bored by these young chicks with and without their fake tits. The MILFs are comming, but a repository as commons has no pics (and currently no Category:MILFs for them). This is really bad. Regards Mutter Erde 09:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per comments in the previous deletion request. Despite assertions at the undeletion request, this is a matter of scope. Commons is here to host images that may be useful for some project. Both pornographic and anatomical aspects have representation in alternative, technically superior (composition, lighting, etc) images. There is no reasonably expected present or future use. The issue of personality rights is also a concern. We should not be assuming or speculating on the model’s permission. The quality of this image is decidedly unprofessional and AGF, by definition, does not apply and is not extended outside of Wiki. What has happened with past images up for deletion is irrelevant; we’re reviewing/discussing this image against policies/guidelines; it needs to stand or fall on its own merit, or lack thereof. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 12:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Both pornographic and anatomical aspects have representation in alternative, technically superior (composition, lighting, etc) images > do we have other MILF erotic nudes? I don't think so. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Age has nothing to do with it. This is a nude woman, nothing more. Go ahead and add this image to a MILF article on any Wiki project and see how long it stays. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 15:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete No model release. Personality and privacy rights issues. Questionable usefulness and what I subjectively consider outside our scope. Rocket000 18:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete why the second bite at the apple in such a short time. The first DR was perfectly fine and consensus seems clear. Please close this as "remain deleted" or explain satisfactorily why this matter was brought up again. For the record I think we improperly closed some of the Klashorst images. ++Lar: t/c 11:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment I think some may misunderstant what I write. I personally don't care about that picture. I'm trying to be the most objective I can and I'm also trying to find any coherence about nude pictures on Commons - which I don't see at all! Delete it (or keep it deleted, may I say?) if you think it's better, I won't be mad about it. But it may be time to have a better and more general discussion about nudity and sexuality on Commons. Because we might all be able to see there's a big problem of coherence! I would understand arguments like those used here when we'd find a better coherence. That's my main concern. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 12:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Lets be absolutely clear: nudity is no reason to delete from the Commons. We have to obey US criminal law, but that doesn't seem at all relevant here. However we have our own rule that a photo of a person in a private situation (especially if intimate or embarrassing) must be consented to by that person. We are accepting photos by recognized artists like Klashorst because these are posed with models, not private shots. I would have voted to delete this picture but [20] (found by following the link to Flickr) shows that it is no private moment but this woman's hobby. --Simonxag 13:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well that's exaclty what I said: privacy is not concerned here so if we're coherent we may not delete it. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 13:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to Simonxag for this nice site. Probably she would donate some more of her pics? As this, a soft one, or this, with a contented smile, or this , following Marilyn's example Mutter Erde 14:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Mutter Erde, that kind of comment won't help your cause! Try to be less provocative and more constructive if you want your opinion to be more respected. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 14:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC) (BTW I gave the same link before Simonxag!)

Cool it. There's only one good argument in the air - she's lying on her private bed - so ask her for a permission and close the debate. No reason to get exited.

Btw:I just have noticed, that the links I have chosen are not working. That really was not my intention. Shame on me. Sorry Mutter Erde 19:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per Elcobbola's comments and per existing consensus of the previous deletion discussion and the undeletion discussion. The keep arguments, in the instances where there actually are arguments, appear to ignore the concerns raised (missing model consent form and what use in a Wikimedia project the image is supposed to serve), instead responding with with counter-arguments to arguments which have not actually been made, or with other stuff exists-based arguments. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Per personality rights. If the person would like to release this image to commons, it would be best if she contact OTRS due to legal issues. miranda 21:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete - Per Lar, this was plenty clear previously. Delete again. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 17:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep We should be very careful about such images, but per Simonxag's reasoning it is quite clear that this woman has given consent to put this on the web. And she is definitely adult. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete I stand by my word as on the other DR about this image. I've also read this DR and see other issues raised here about this image. Lar and Rocket pretty much said it too. --Kanonkas_(talk) 18:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

comment For a best definition I propose that subjective details like beauty,including utility,that "I think" can be a personal concept,are not neutral.The problem is now,exactly, what is missing on this image to be here on commons.An OTRS permission?or meaby something more easy to find?Confidentially,I want to say that I like this image that I think ЭLСОВВОLД can't be find any other like this on commons.Do you know another one here? Vicond

There's no impetus on me to provide anything; I trust you know how categories work. Scope requires images be useful for a project; what article in what project would you expect this to be useful now or in the future? MILF has been suggested, but no consideration appears to have been given to the fact that, although Wiki is not censored, projects generally do not use images which are more explicit than absolutely necessary. As I said above, go ahead and add this image to a MILF article and see whether it sticks. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 15:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I can understand your wievpoint but I want to say that commons have a lot of images that seemingly don't have any utility, but maybe can help to complement the main information of an specific article.I'm propposed ,in the other DR,a new category for old womens.So,I believe that it can be a commons's objective too.

PD:I don't know what means MILF.Could you explain me,please? Vicond

@Vicond: 8 MILF-interwikis: da:Milf, de:Mom I’d Like to Fuck, es:MILF, fr:MILF, it:MILF, no:MILF, sv:Milf + en:MILF with other meanings :-)

There seems to be a little misunderstanding of the function of commons. Commons is not only a repository for around 750 wikipedia projects, but especially a gallery for print houses. Otherwise this policy would make no sense: "Generally speaking, image quality and resolution should be as high as possible so images can be used in high-quality printouts, for example" (Source: Commons:First_steps/Quality_and_description#Images) Mutter Erde 22:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Commons having a lot of images with seemingly no utility is not a reason to keep any particular one that has no utility... see w:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS... that's from en:wp but the principle applies here. ++Lar: t/c 14:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record: Something like this ("This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it...", no interwikis) would be deleted on German wikipedia within 5 minutes. Mutter Erde (talk) 10:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Pr ADs previous close and a lot of comments in this and the previous DR. Finn Rindahl (talk) 09:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. For real. Please ask me if you want some reasoning. --O (谈 • висчвын) 17:37, 18 June 2008 (GMT)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Susan.jpg

Really poor quality picture. It isn't used in any project. Very light description. For me, it's out of scope. Pymouss Tchatcher - 18:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment I didn't see that it was the 3rd that this image is nominated for deletion. But, perhaps, it was not the same before. --Pymouss Tchatcher - 18:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, this is not the same image. Эlcobbola _talk 19:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep them both Mutter Erde (talk) 19:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete unless some use is found. -Nard the Bard 21:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tillywb.jpg

Not free. This 2-dimensional artwork depicted is copyrighted by it's painter - whose identity is unclear, but most likely did not die over 70 years ago. --Evrik 01:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Incomplete request. Listed on 2008/06/05. Rocket000 18:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep. Although this painting appears to have been done by "VS STUDIOS
@ mail.com", and so could not have been done over 70 years ago, and the original painting on the site was "painted over the winter of 1955-1956" per w:Tillie, the image that inspired them is much older, as demonstrated by {{PD-Art}} Image:Steeplechase jack 1905.jpg. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 20:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete. Public domain status is not viral; a work does not enter the public domain simply by being inspired by a public domain work. To use an analogy, a musician performing his interpretation of a classical piece of music holds the copyright to any recordings of his own performance. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

If this were an original work taking inspiration from something in the public domain, I'd tend to agree; but this seems more of a simple copy than a reinterpretation with sufficent originality to be considred a new work. I don't the music analogy applies; I'd see this more as writing out a copy of a few bars of a public domain composition from old sheet music on to a fresh piece of paper. -- Infrogmation 03:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep It has been established that the original work was fromt he 1890s. A modern copy of a public domain work does not generate a new copyright per US law. (The added email address I believe should be seen more as an advertisment for the sign restorer than any claim of new copyright.) -- Infrogmation 03:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep Semms to be more a copy than a reinterpretation. ...Forrester 10:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
KeepIf the painting was published in the US before 1978 without a copyright notice then it's PD-US-no notice. --Simonxag 01:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment Comparing to Image:Steeplechase jack 1905.jpg, this mural definitely appears to include "original expression", which I believe (could be wrong) is the standard under US law for when a reproduction takes on its own copyright. However, Simonxag's point about pre-1978 no notice could sway me toward "keep"; but I would want to be sure that's the correct interpretation of US law. Werewombat 14:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Clearly has sufficient originality (not a mere copy), but nonetheless there's no (c) so it's {{PD-US-no notice}} Mangostar (talk) 02:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete This is absolutely not a copy. The expression is the same as in Image:Steeplechase jack 1905.jpg but the details are different. There is originality. Furthermore, there is no Freedom of panorama in the US. I am unsure about the claim that there is no copyright because there is no copyright notice, though. How are copyright notices of wall paintings processed? We can't be sure this is PD. Patrícia ^msg 14:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I assume that we need to discuss your predication "There is originality" deeper. Everything esle you say is imho not doubtable. [[ Forrester ]] 13:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

What I mean with originality is: if this wall painting is based on the character depicted in Image:Steeplechase jack 1905.jpg, as Jeff G. pointed out, the new work is sufficiently different from the original to be considered a new artwork. I agree this is a subjective point of view. I'm not sure this was what I was unclear about. Patrícia ^msg 14:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you want to say, but the question is: are you right? Since (as you said correctly) this is a "subjective point of view". I assume we have no definitive proof for en:Threshold of originality...But as a matter of fact I would accept a deletion since it's quite hard to say....that's also the reason why I said "Semms to be...." [[ Forrester ]] 16:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Giggy (talk) 07:35, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 6

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gabriel Fahrenheit.jpg

It is J. Watt. See Image:Hw-watt.jpg --Chesnok 17:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC) Italic text

Cool. Kept and tagged with {{rename}}. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 09:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Alison_Lapper_Pregnant_-_Trafalgar_Square.jpg

This photograph is of a temporary installation, thus not covered by FoP; which makes it a derivative work of a copyrighted sculpture, hence the claimed license is invalid. Another picture of the same installation has already been nominated for deletion here. 92.40.14.67 01:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment The linked page(Alison Lapper) openly admits that this is a temporary installation and this picture is thus a (presumably unintentional) copyvio; so what on earth is it doing on Commons? -- 92.40.14.67 01:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Per above. --TheHellraiser 02:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Taken in good faith, but a clear copyvio I'm afraid. MichaelMaggs 06:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Miramontes_patent.jpg

watermarked and increctly liscenced 207.161.213.17 02:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Watermarks suck, but aren't against the rules. It was incorrectly license, but I've fixed that. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:B-Factory Comite Directivo 2.pdf

Fuera del Commons:Alcance del proyecto. Business ad Text file Out of Commons Scope --WayneRay 02:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Powerpoint! ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Logo Raruto.png

No permission, copyrighted --TheHellraiser 02:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Portada 3 Raruto.jpg

No permission, copyrighted --TheHellraiser 02:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Respiratory system complete en.svg

No authorative or reliable source is provided for the inline text or description. --99.240.196.9 03:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Kept. Abusive DR ShakataGaNai ^Talk 04:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Her_Majesty Queen Elizabeth II with Prime Minister The Rt. Hon. Pierre Elliott Trudeau signing the Constitution.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images. Rob 05:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete (regretfully). The statements in [21] and [22] are pretty clear--the copyright is owned by the archives, and they do not allow modification or redistribution. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 05:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Chris_Kline_Contra_GDC07a.jpg

Appears to be copied from consplayers.com, whose vague licensing policy can be seen here. Identical images were deleted as copyvios on en-wiki--see en:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 25#Image:Vertexguy01.jpg, en:User talk:8BitRulez, and en:Special:DeletedContributions/8BitRulez (sysops only). jonny-m t ^{en me!} 08:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I found a very similar picture but it is not the same. In fact it is obvious that these images are _not_ from Consplayer because the consplayer images are much nicer (no motion blur). Keep on all them unless you can find two images that are actually identical between the sites. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment While I can buy that the other one is not copyrighted, this one appears to be from the same set as en:Image:Vertexguy02.jpg, which is listed by the uploader (who appears to be the same on both projects; see my response to the other image for more information) as belonging to Cosplayers. I'd be happy to undelete it for a temporary review if you'd like. --jonny-mt ^{en me!} 15:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  - I hate to be a stick in the mud, but I noticed a few things: #1 - This image is larger than the copy on consplayer.com (by a bit) - so it would be impossible for him to have just "cut off" the watermark. #2 - This picture is taken from the right hand side of the stage, where as most of the consplayer images were taken from the left or center of stage. #3 - I can't find any images in the gallery that are almost identical or identical to the DR's you nom'd.
  - If you think it will help - you can go ahead and undelete that one image temporarily on en.wp (Oh how I wish Commons admins had global deleted file viewing ability) and poke me on my talk page. I'll take a look - but at this point I think the images that he uploaded are actually his own. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 19:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    - Well, there's always the proposed global admin group :) Anyways, after walking away for a little bit and coming back with fresh eyes, I'm inclined now to agree with you. I'd been keeping an eye on these photos since they were added at once by the uploader of the original copyvios (incidentally, the "cropped watermark" comment in the deletion log only refers to a comment I made at en:Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 25#Image:Vertexguy01.jpg about en:Image:Vertexguy03.jpg, where the image you linked above was re-uploaded with the watermark cropped out). But the arguments above combined with an e-mail I received from the uploader explaining where the images came from have convinced me, so I'm going to go hunt down the templates I need to withdraw and close these nominations. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 02:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 02:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Beat me to the keep. But I removed all the templates already. So don't worry. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Chris_Kline_Contra_GDC07b.jpg

Appears to be copied from consplayers.com, whose vague licensing policy can be seen here. Identical images were deleted as copyvios on en-wiki--see en:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 25#Image:Vertexguy01.jpg, en:User talk:8BitRulez, and en:Special:DeletedContributions/8BitRulez (sysops only). jonny-m t ^{en me!} 08:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Per [23] --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn per [24]. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 02:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:VGL2.jpg

Appears to be copied from consplayers.com, whose vague licensing policy can be seen here. Identical images were deleted as copyvios on en-wiki--see en:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 25#Image:Vertexguy01.jpg, en:User talk:8BitRulez, and en:Special:DeletedContributions/8BitRulez (sysops only). jonny-m t ^{en me!} 08:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Per [25] --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn per [26]. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 02:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Chris_Kline_GANG1.jpg

Appears to be copied from consplayers.com, whose vague licensing policy can be seen here. Identical images were deleted as copyvios on en-wiki--see en:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 25#Image:Vertexguy01.jpg, en:User talk:8BitRulez, and en:Special:DeletedContributions/8BitRulez (sysops only). jonny-m t ^{en me!} 08:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Per [27] --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn per [28]. --jonny-m t ^{en me!} 02:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lipovljani.PNG

Please delete this image. I uploaded this image few months ago. Wrong licence and this image isn't for commons --Suradnik13 09:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete--Zapos 18:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Givatayim_Observatory_Logo.jpg

cpivio, its a logo and the uploder set the permission as Fair use Hidro 10:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey please don't delete it, I am the uploader. Is fair use not allowed? what is the tightest copytight I can give it? Shy halatzi 11:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, fair use is not allowed on Commons. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:First_night_at_the_observatory.jpg

cpivio, ~~its a logo~~ and the uploder set the permission as Fair use Hidro 10:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey please don't delete it, I am the uploader. It is not a logo. What's wrong with it? Shy halatzi 11:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, fair use is not allowed on Commons. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:IAA_Logo.JPG

cpivio, its a logo and the uploder set the permission as Fair use Hidro 10:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey please don't delete it, I am the uploader. Is fair use not allowed? what is the tightest copytight I can give it? Shy halatzi 11:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete No fair use on Commons. --Pymouss Tchatcher - 00:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, no fair use allowed on Commons. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Benzyl.svg

Uploade with wrong name IngerAlHaosului 13:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Tagged for speedy deletion. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by 32X: 16:01, 6 June 2008 32X (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Image:Benzyl.svg" ‎ (Duplicated file: Image:Benzyl-group.svg) (restore) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ixus-p1010137.jpg

sofja 79.130.189.245 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Despite that I am NOT the photographer or uploader of the original image, WHY should this image be deleted? I can not see any reason. --217.10.60.85 14:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, it's imperfect but it's in use. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:The White Album.svg

copyvio, same reason as Image:Making_Movies.svg --Balabiot 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Balabiot 14:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what Image:Making_Movies.svg was, but this image is way too simple to be copyrighted. It's merely the text "The Beatles" on a plain white background, which is ineligible for copyright, just as most company logos are (see Category:Company logos). Simple text like this cannot be copyrighted, even if it does appear as part of a copyrighted album's artwork. The "Zoso" logo (Image:Zoso.svg) from the album Led Zeppelin IV was nominated for deletion as well, but its result was keep because a small group of characters are not eligible for copyright. Dream out loud 22:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

It was this, the cover of a Dire Straits album. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep It's some text. pd-ineligible. -N 23:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Undoubtedly ineligible; I think the Making Movies DR was errantly closed. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:The Beatles album cover.jpg for my comments. --Hautala 11:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment pardon, but this is insane. Ask a random bunch of people to write "Zoso" with fancy characters. If they put a line between the o's and one below, and draw a kind of triangle on the bottom line, I'll agree that this is ineligible. same for Making Movies. if you give a random bunch of people a red background, a light blue rectangle, a light blue semicircle, and ask them to arrange them in some way and write "Dire Straits" and "Making Movies" (you could replace "Dire Straits" and "Making Movies" with "Deers' rights" and "Telling stories" to avoid influencing people). Again, if all of them put the rectangle on the right side, the semicircle next to the rectangle, and write the text vertically in the rectangle, then Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Making Movies.svg was ineligible too.

I doubt that this would happen in any sane experiment, and actually I doubt that most people if asked to write "The Beatles" on a blank sheet of paper would write it in grey, would write "The BEATLES" with the right combo of lowercase/uppercase, and would push it slightly towards the right edge. Even people who know the cover!!!

The reason why I doubt that, is because you are asking people to use creativity, and creativity is how the original artists came up with these concepts. Creative work makes anything a work of art; and even if the result is very simple, "ineligibility" might make indipendent reinvention not a copyvio, but attempts to mock would remain copyvio without any doubt. All IMNSHO. Balabiot 06:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. This is the clearest {{pd-ineligible}} I have come across in some time. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Cuzco_signing.jpg

I can't imagine why this should be public domain, I didn't find a clause in peruvian law on the copyright status of official works.Code·is·poetry 14:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC) PS: Duplicate at Image:SignCuzco.jpg.

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 12:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Galleria_dell'Accademia,_Lorenzo_Monaco,_Trionfo_della_Morte.JPG

It's blurred Diomede 14:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

so what? Blurred images have to be cancelled only when a better version is uploaded. Did you upload a better version?? --Sailko 14:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Keep until a non-blurred equivalent version is uploaded, as the policy says. --Sailko 14:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fra_Bartolomeo,_Christ.JPG

Blurred image Diomede 14:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Keep until a non-blurred equivalent version is uploaded, as the policy says. --Sailko 14:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Santa_Trinita,_Giovanni_da_ponte,_martirio_di_san_bartolomeo_1(1434).JPG

It is a blurred copy of the Image:Image:Santa trinita, giovanni dal ponte, martirio di san bartolomeo (1434).JPG Diomede 14:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete: Yes delete, check Image:Santa trinita, giovanni dal ponte, martirio di san bartolomeo (1434).JPG --Sailko 15:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Very clearly superseded; will be universally replaced shortly. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Diablo2.jpg

Possible copyright violation. No specific source and no specific statement from the author about the usage of the logo provided. Chech Explorer 15:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, definitely a copyright violation; I don't expect Blizzard release the logos from their games under a free license. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Supermercadosperuanos.gif

"Logo de la Empresa Supermercados Peruanos". Even though re-drawn, this is a non-free image. Angusmclellan 15:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:E2C_JASDF.jpg

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DoNotFeedTroll.svg

Nonsense, Wikipedia, etc. should't create a new view - it should show excisting views. So this picture is not relevant. And in fact it is important to improve the mood in Wikipedia... see this relevant (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Welt) german Page: http://www.welt.de/kultur/article1271014/Wikipedia_laufen_die_fleissigen_Autoren_weg.html. And read here (German): "In jüngster Zeit hat die Wikipediagemeinde zunehmend Schwierigkeiten, engagierte Autoren zu finden bzw. zu halten. Eine im Herbst 2007 veröffentlichte Erhebung in der englischsprachigen Version ergab, dass erstmals seit Gründung die Wikipedia sinkendes Engagement ihrer vormals als Autoren aktiven Benutzer zu verzeichnen hat und auch die Zahl der Neuanmeldungen rückläufig ist. Einer der Hauptgründe ist laut Studie ein immer rauer werdender Umgangston innerhalb der Gemeinde.[17]" from http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Sozialstruktur_der_Autoren —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.160.69.184 (talk • contribs) Kam Solusar 11:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC) (UTC)

Speedy keep - blatant nonsense. --Kam Solusar 11:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Throw it away. It's a graphic that is often used to discriminate users (they are told to be a "troll"). But the german Article shows that this is a real problem for wikipedia -"the users run away" (excerpt of the article). So show muscle and begin to clean up Wikis from discriminating content. --84.160.71.14 15:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I can't discern a reason for deletion neither in English or German. If there is a problem at a Wikipedia somewhere, start a discussion there. Thuresson 20:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. In use on hundreds of pages across many projects. This is not our problem. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 13:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Scarlett-johansson-1.jpg

Uploaded to English wikipedia by en:User:Drfreid, who's 12 edits there include vandalizing ([29]). The only source for this photo is English Wikipedia. "Drfreid" claims that the photo is public domain but has not substantiated that claim. Thuresson 21:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, obvious copyvio. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Zamek_Bierzgłowski_outsite_1.jpg

Accidentally uploaded to the wrong name; image has been reuploaded to Image:Zamek Bierzgłowski outside 1.jpg. Please delete this version. Thanks. Mike Peel 21:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC) Mike Peel 21:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted; please use {{badname}} next time. :) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lennon_Ono_Trudeau_1969.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Collections_canada_PA-197391.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:John_Turner_Liberal_Leadership_Convention_1984.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Turner_at_House_of_Commons_after_becoming_PM.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Turnerreturns.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Turneryoung.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sauvé-cropped.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Measuring_fingerprints_w_compass_RCMP.jpg

This is a suspected copyvio, like others at Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images. Since the date of publication isn't given, it might be public domain, but I think we have to assume it's not old enough, until given a date of publication. --Rob 22:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PierrePilote.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Jack_Lemmon_1967.jpg

Copyvio per Commons:Deletion requests/Library and Archives Canada non-PD images Rob 22:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gavel.jpg

Not a federal product (.gov != fed), SCAQMD is a regional authority. ---N 23:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:GMA Kelly-Clarkson.jpg

The credit is given as (an unnamed) "ABC photographer", but then it's tagged as released into the public domain by the author, something which major-network photographers aren't in the habit of doing; and there is no indication that the uploader is actually the creator or owner of this picture. Dtobias 23:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted as obvious copyvio. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Picnic_resort_in_Prabhadevi_area!to_be_converted_to_buildings..JPG

Outside the Commons:Scope. -N 23:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep as per comments here. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep WayneRay 03:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay as above

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Last_farmland_within_Mumbai_city_in_'Prabhadevi_area'.JPG

Outside the Commons:Scope. -N 23:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep No it's not. In fact, it might even be of historical significance if the description is right. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 00:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep WayneRay 03:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay as above
Keep per Lewis Collard. --AVRS 13:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Village_sceane,_'Lokhandwalla_furure_bldg_project..JPG

Outside the Commons:Scope. -N 23:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep as per comments here. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep WayneRay 03:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)WayneRay as above

Kept. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mariadanielatorrealba.jpg

Flickrwashing. Flickr account contains low-res versions of professional celeb shots of people from Venezuela, Brazil, and the Philippines. Lupo 09:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. As copyvio ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, re-opened. After a look at the uploader's user page and contributions:

In fact, all uploads of User:Speedracer05 (who claims to be the Flickr account owner and to work for a pageant company in the Philippines) are suspect. A credible OTRS permission from the company would be needed at least. Lupo 09:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, Missed that. This users images will needed to be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Some images are suspicious, some are self made, other have OTRS perm, and still more are from other websites. Confusing. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 09:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete All images from that Flickr account are blatant copyvios. Spellcast (talk) 16:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Flickr account is uploading copyvios. Kanonkas_(talk) 21:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Williams_Planetarium.jpg

cpivio, its not a free image and the uploder set the permission as "free for Fair use while indicate the source" Hidro 10:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am the uploader, please don't delete the files. I will change the permission. Which permission is the strongest copyright? Shy halatzi 11:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I removed the fair use comment. PLEASE DO NOT DELETE THE FILE! it takes a long time to upload it back. Shy halatzi 10:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

are you the copyright owner of that image? Hidro 21:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Collard: Copyright violation: disagreement from the IAA board as to whether the picture should be uploaded, contact me for the tl;dr

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Una_selva_de_ambiente_stereo.jpg

Is this a poster? Kimse 05:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Probably.--Londoneye 11:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Maxim: Deleted because "In cateogry Unknown as of 7 June 2008; no license/permission/source". using TW

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Arill_Riise_TV_2_Landstinget.jpg

Screenshot. See image description. Chech Explorer 15:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Clearly a screenshot. Pruneau 16:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Arill_Riise_Landstinget-_TV_2.jpg

Screenshot. See image description. Chech Explorer 15:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Clearly a screenshot. Pruneau 16:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Cyrano.JPG

Still image from a French movie from 1960. Why should this be PD? Lupo 09:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Certainly not PD-self as claimed. Pruneau 16:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, not PD. Kameraad Pjotr 14:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ernstroehm.jpg

Not old enough for PD Sargoth 16:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The image is older than 1935. It is older than needed for PD. 72.229.48.178 22:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Unless someone can provide proof that the author died more than 70 years ago or that the author remained anonymous. --Kam Solusar 11:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep It is highly unlikely that the author survived much longer since it is a very old photograph, and the author is anonymous. Many photographs such as this were taken in public rallies. Zarbon (talk) 13:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Zarbon has consistently been warned for copyvios, and there is no proof as to ownership etc. Deleting. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HPLC kolom.jpg

copyright violation: author confirmed to me that it was copied from some other website --Josq 09:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Rly? Special:Contributions/Plaatjesman shows no discussion with you. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 01:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Off-wiki discussion. Uploader is a student of a project that I coordinate. Apparently copied from http://www.thermo.com/com/cda/newsevents/events_detail/1,3084,20125,00.html Josq (talk) 09:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Very well then. Deleted. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 02:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sharp_SX862_Internet.jpg

and Image:SX862 cover.jpg, Image:SX862 side.jpg, Image:Sharp SX862 Internet chi.jpg.

Most likely advertisement. Also contains web sites screenshots. EugeneZelenko 15:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 09:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lupo 15:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Paul_Curreri.jpg

do not have rights Artaxerxes 15:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Note: Deletion request is by the uploader. I presume the uploader realized it was improperly licensed. No usage of file in Wikimedia found. -- Infrogmation 22:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Cirt (talk) 05:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:LOGOASV.gif

Possible copyright violation. Insuficient information about the author and the licensing of the logo. Chech Explorer 15:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ludwig thoma karl klimsch1909.jpg

What's this? Probably the bot doesn't understand the Bavarian language --Mutter Erde 20:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep It's author was Karl Klimsch (1867-1936)[30], PD-Old license is valid. Filip em 18:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. PD-Art Yann (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Cockfighting_in_Rolligon_Cockpit(Manila).jpg

Poor quality, hard to tell what this picture is of. -N 00:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Neutral but maybe Keep because we don't have any other pictures of "cockfighting arena" on Commons so it might be better to have a poor one than nothing. We may delete it later if we find a better image with an equivalent subject. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 09:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep We can ask for a better quality pic, but when coupled with the captioning/file name I found this to be quite an eye opener about the social and commercial setting of cockfighting in the Philippines. Werewombat 19:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep, better than nothing! TimVickers (talk) 16:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Kept. Yann (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:JosephJRoberts.jpg

New Jersey maintains copyright. allows verbatim copying only. not suffiently free. ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No licence MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:OSFT.jpg

rights not properly arranged Artaxerxes 23:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

If you haven’t created this image, or were not allowed to take it, just put {{copyvio}} with an appropriate reason on it. If you have the copyright of this image and would like it to stay on Commons, you just can put {{Personality rights}} under the license tag. --AVRS 12:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No licenceMichaelMaggs (talk) 10:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:The Beatles album cover.jpg

As an album cover, it is inherently a non-free image. The uploader claims this cover is ineligible for copyright because it is "too simple". szyslak 08:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The uploader here. It is too simple because:

It has nothing but the words "The BEATLES" on the foreground. You can't copyright two words.
The words don't form anything pictorial and are in fact in a common typeface, which are public domain.
The background is plain, you can't copyright a plain colour.

When you say that album covers are inherently non-free, you should be saying that in practice almost all album covers can be and are protected by copyright. This one is very exceptional in that sense. Please also see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Nirvana album cover.jpg. --Hautala 11:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Could you please point to the copyright law that says things that are too "simple" can't be copyrighted? This is a copyrighted image that doesn't belong on Commons. However, you're free to upload it to a wiki that allows fair use images, such as the English Wikipedia. In fact, on enwiki's version of the image, it's tagged as fair use. szyslak 21:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The U.S. Copyright Office has on the page Copyright Office Basics answer to the question "What Is Not Protected by Copyright?". According to it,

"Titles, names" are not protected, meaning the words "The BEATLES" are not protected as the title of the album or the name of the band
"mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring" are not protected, meaning that as the font used on the cover is not protected as it is just one of the zillion similar fonts
"Works consisting entirely of information that is common property and containing no original authorship" are not protected, which is legal mumbo jumbo for "simple". --Hautala 12:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep Just because it's famous doesn't mean it's copyrighted. --Fb78 14:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep Yes, it is really strange, and probably it is not that useful to have just one album cover, and not the others. But it really seems to me that you cannot copyright such a straightforward idea, no matter you use that as an album cover. --Mormegil 17:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Delete I think that the reason given above should consider the artistic value of the image, too. Its simplicity is not casual, it is a precise design choice adding value to the composition. We can see this cover as the music biz equivalent of a Lucio Fontana painting. And they are copyrighted :-) --Jollyroger 08:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know the case of the paintings, but I dare to disagree that simplicity would be copyrighted if even it was artistic. If the cover was even simpler, all white for example, that would be an artistic decision just as well and would probably have artistic value as well (it's one of the most famous album covers), but still, that would not mean the record company would gain copyrights to white colour or plain album covers. --Hautala 11:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed with Hautala. The thing that there has been much deliberation put into some decision does not make the result copyrightable. Compare this with e.g. book titles. An author may spend days choosing a good name, but still, the name itself is not protected by copyright. [31] --Mormegil 12:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep Agree with Mormegil. Additionally, pure texts are not copyrightable. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep per Bryan, ^{__ ABF __} ϑ 10:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Kept --Digon3 ^talk Too simple to be copyrighted

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:The Beatles album cover.jpg

reopening as copyvio, now that Image:Making_Movies.svg has been deleted. --Balabiot 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Balabiot 14:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep. Why do you think it's eligible, Balabiot? (In before "John Cage copyrighted four minutes and thirty three seconds of silence so it must be".) I think Trixt's assessment of the Making Movies deletion request was wrong. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 18:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep pd-ineligible. AYFK? -N 23:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- "AYFK?"? Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  - Are you effing kidding. -N 03:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
    - Oh. :D Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 03:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
    - NNAA (No, not at all). Because most people if asked to write "The Beatles" on a blank sheet of paper would not write it in grey, would not write "The BEATLES" with the right combo of lowercase/uppercase, and would not push it slightly towards the right edge. Even people who know the cover. That makes it a work of art, despite its simplicity (which might be a reason to not consider copyvio an independent reinvention -- but not an admitted attempt to mock the original work of art). Balabiot 06:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
      - And if you told someone to type out Microsoft, then they probably wouldn't use the same font and "pac man" idea as this, but this is our classic case of ineligibility. Indeed, if I asked you to write the word "this" right now, I dare say you wouldn't end up writing exactly the same thing as this, but I'd be silly to say this was some kind of unique, copyrighted expression. (Please don't gratuitously accuse N of personal attacks, by the way; what he said was nothing of the sort.) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 14:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I vote Keep like above. Please also see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:The White Album.svg. --Hautala 11:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept as {{pd-ineligible}} – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:HK_Worldwide_House_The_Beverly_Hills_Central_Tram_Stop_1.JPG

Unfree image of advertising hoardings. This has not been taken to illustrate the building but the advertising (see the image categories). MichaelMaggs 06:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment I don't know. I can't really read anything after "The Beverly Hills" (Granted I can't read Chinese - but I can't even make out the characters). I agree there is alot of advertising there - but there is just as much in Time Square or several other major cities. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You don't need to be able to read it, as there are large obvious photographic images that are copyright protected. --MichaelMaggs 10:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have drafted a new page for discussion about this. See Commons:De minimis. --MichaelMaggs 15:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Legal in Hong Kong under COM:FOP. -N 12:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I'm afraid not. HK law uses exactly the same word as the UK law from which it derives, and 2D images, posters, photographs etc are not permitted, even if permanently located in a public place. See COM:FOP. --MichaelMaggs 13:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete I agree we can't apply FOP, and the advertising definitely is not de minimis. Just based on the raw percentage of the image area occupied by the ads, it can't be treated as incidental or insignificant. The photo composition (extended upward to capture the big ad) and categorization just seal the case. Werewombat 19:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Sorry for late reply. I would like to clarify what the photo contains. The subject of the photo is a tram stop and a building. Beside them, there are 9 pieces of advertising posters appeared in the photo, instead of one single advertising. Consider what the photographer had taken and how he could avoid the advertising, I don't think it has breached COM:FOP. Baycrest(Talk) 18:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete, the ad is copyrighted. --Minghong (talk) 08:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
KeepI saw a lot of photo about the street and the Hong Kong law about coryright,call "COPYRIGHT ORDINANCE".I don't think this photo against the "COPYRIGHT ORDINANCE".—Railhk0512 (talk) 14:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep per Baycrest. -- Kevinhksouth (talk) 03:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Take a photo in a public area in Hong Kong does not contravene anyone's copyright. --✉Hello World! 16:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep It does not violate COM:FOP.--Hargau (talk) 05:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This is not a vote. Could one of you who has voted to keep without reasons please explain the legal basis for your vote? Assertions that it does not violate copyright are not enough. You need to explain why. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Because the law in China and Hong Kong specifically exempts these works from protection. Please read COM:FOP. As we've already stated. -N 20:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I'm afraid not (again). HK law uses exactly the same word as the UK law from which it derives, and 2D images, posters, photographs etc are not permitted, even if permanently located in a public place. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Does not satisfy Commons:De minimis: most of the image is comprised of copyrighted content, and there is no COM:FOP in HK. Patrícia ^msg 14:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tim_OBrien.jpg

proper rights not arranged Artaxerxes 19:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

No license. Deleted. Badseed ^talk 03:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Reiter des Kavallerie-Regiments 18.jpg

Merté died in 1938 [32], so this picture will not be in the public domain until 2009. --Jergen 07:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC) --Jergen 07:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Anfrage beim Rechteinhaber an der Postkarte heute abgesandt. --Milgesch 09:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment So we've waited only 99.3% of the time we needed to wait for this to pass into PD? Yes, technically it should be deleted. Werewombat 19:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Update (stays up-to-date): We waited 100% of the time we needed to wait. My opinion: Let's wait the last 0 %. (but it should be deleted until then....) [[ Forrester ]] 22:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Let's be hard! Not PD. Will undelete it 2009 :) [[ Forrester ]] 22:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Flag_of_Menton_and_Roquebrune.gif

Apparently a fair-use image but tagged with CC-SA license. Probably not suitable for Commons. Angusmclellan 13:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete barring clarification. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

CC-SA permission obtained – Goustien 07:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Obtained how? Do we have confirmation? — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 22:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Needed to trun a blind eye on this.... [[ Forrester ]] 22:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Penis-Composite-CirumsisedandUncircumsised.jpg

We still didn't have such images in Category:Penis? EugeneZelenko 15:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep well see it by yourself in the cat and sub-cat. I don't think we have any equivalent. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 09:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete: The description of the scrotum is wrong in the second image, i wonder, if this images are self-taken, the second one seems to be copied from any source. --Martin H. (talk) 12:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. [[ Forrester ]] 23:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Freystschl.jpg

Insufficient information to justify PD tag -mattbuck (Talk) 18:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you please ask Luxo (he is stated as the uploader) for that? Thanks, HardDisk (aka CommonismNow) 22:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. [[ Forrester ]] 23:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June 7

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Female_Students_Standing_Guard.jpg

this user's flickrstream is just a compilation of photos found elsewhere. the url given as the source for this photo is now dead, so who knows if the licensing was correct. Mangostar 01:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Untrustworthy Flickr account. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 08:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Listen_to_Music.jpg

Copyrighted image from http://www.ifunpix.com/everywhere.aspx Kimse 01:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Shanghai_University_Students.jpg

Copyrighted image from http://en.beijing2008.cn/36/31/article214003136.shtml Kimse 01:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Business_Language.jpg

Copyrighted image from http://guide.sacbee.com/119/story/654.html Kimse 01:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Coverberkleemusic.jpg

Copyrighted image from http://www.berkleemusic.com/ Kimse 01:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Farhad_Khoiee-Abbasi1.jpg

Derivative of a copyrighted sign. -N 02:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Complete nonsense. It's a picture of a man who happens to be holding a sign, which is hardly a derivative. This nomination, and the other two, reek of POINT. Night Ranger 06:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept, it's a man holding a sign, and a sign in plain text at that. Consider your point made, N. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 06:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Wasparksign.jpg

Derivative of a copyrighted sign. -N 02:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Now THIS can be construed as a derivative. Go ahead and delete it. Night Ranger 06:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, as there's no objection from the uploader. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 08:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mancora_beach1.jpg

Reviewed the same day it was uploaded. License is unfree. -N 02:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Amanda_Seyfried.png

I doubt the author is really "yo" or "me" in English. -N 02:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Me too. Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:YSL_First-Page.JPG

Possible copyright violation. Couldn't find anything about GFDL on the web site. Chech Explorer 04:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted, derivative work, GFDL very unlikely. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 06:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tony_Furtado.jpg

proper rights not arranged Artaxerxes 03:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. No source, no license since February.Ahonc (talk) 12:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:EG_LIAN4_33.JPG

Maybe the user stiched the image but it smells like copyright violation. Chech Explorer 04:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Same here. Also a really bad shoop. Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 08:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Background_Info.hosmane.08.pdf

Outside of project scope, vanity. MER-C 10:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 12:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tom_cavalcante_ronaltom.jpg

Contradictory licensing terms. Image caption may imply that the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 11:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Carlos_gamarra2.jpg

i took this photo from internet without proper autorization Hujadila 20:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Teri-200.jpg

Unclear copyright status. It looks like a screenshot or promotional material (professional quality) Trixt 20:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. By User:Siebrand ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Free_Software_Portal_Logo.svg

Copyvio. The BSD Daemon is fully copyrighted, and the FAL license for the GNU head requires the whole work to be sharealike. -N 20:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Floss_draft.png

The BSD Daemon is copyrighted :( -N 20:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mail_DG_RI_bourseQuébec.pdf

Outside the Commons:Scope. -N 20:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. It's a letter... Out of scoped out of existence. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Softtek_logo.gif

No evidence that the uploader has authorisation to publish this logo. Publication is not enough in any case. Listed as fair-use of a non-free logo on enwiki, same uploader. Angusmclellan 21:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. As copyvio ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ralph_Keller_1938.jpg

Outside the Commons:Scope. -N 00:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep Maybe illustrative of historical portraits or photographic techniques. Even if it's not, I like it. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Nice period hairstyle --Simonxag 00:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Kept. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Casa_da_Fazenda_Quissama_frente_01.jpg

My own fault. Redundant. Quissamã 00:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Redundant to which file? Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded it again with another name.

--Quissamã 06:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Esquema_de_Beowulf.jpg

The information from the image can be represented by a table or in another way. Chech Explorer 03:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete just text --Simonxag 00:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. ShakataGaNai ^Talk 07:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ambassador_1950_advert.jpg

False license. There was no Creative Commons back in the 1950s. Chech Explorer 04:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

It is from a defunct British motorcycle manufacturer in an obsolete magazine so there is nobody to ask for pemission - I've removed it from the new wikipedia article on Ambassador Motorcyles - but is there a case for a 'fair use' just on this article? TR001 12:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You can use the image 70 years after the magazine company locked down. --Chech Explorer 14:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted by Siebrand

Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2008/06

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Contents

[edit] June 1

[edit] Image:200px-Apocalyptica-I_Don't_Care.jpg

[edit] Image:Telegraphstamp.jpg

[edit] Image:Postage Stamp.jpg

[edit] Image:Ahmed Khadr in 1985 Pakistan.jpg

[edit] Image:Zinfandel_grapes.jpg

[edit] Image:Newphy.jpg

[edit] Image:Olta Boka.jpg

[edit] Image:Umraojaan 4.jpg

[edit] Image:Granier.jpg

[edit] Image:WW2 - Baltic full-scale offensive, 1944 (general).jpg

[edit] Image:Tomba di Roberto il Guiscardo.jpg

[edit] Image:Angelica_garzon_sanchez.JPG

[edit] Image:08AshleyMedal.jpg

[edit] Image:CCF15032008_00000.jpg

[edit] Image:CUHK.svg

[edit] Image:Ccshslogo.jpg

[edit] Image:A_Black_Cat01b700px.gif

[edit] Image:Editix_schema_editor.png

[edit] Image:Balagangadhara_video_still.jpg

[edit] Image:DSCF0082.JPG

[edit] Image:Ll.jpg

[edit] Image:DSCF0088.JPG

[edit] Image:FlandriaWsch..gif

[edit] Image:Zorro colorado.jpg

[edit] Image:Tol_1.jpg

[edit] Image:Våbenskjold-Ahlefeldt-Laurvig.jpg

[edit] Image:Queen_Elizabeth_II_inspects_the_garde_at_Expo67,_Montréal.jpg

[edit] Image:ROCKEROS_y_BORREGOS.pdf

[edit] Image:Klim Kamenko.pdf

[edit] Image:Sophia_iznutri.jpg

[edit] Image:Adolf Bertram.jpg

[edit] Image:Daniel_alcides.jpg

[edit] Image:4_MONTAGNE_STE_VICTOIRE_1.jpg

[edit] Image:Uecker by Wolleh.jpg

[edit] Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg

[edit] Image:EUFORIA_logo.jpg

[edit] June 2

[edit] Image:Marcus_Tallberg2.JPG

[edit] Image:Requisitospw.png

[edit] Image:Alesana2_2.jpg

[edit] Image:BauchklangPhil.jpg

[edit] Image:Nick2_Assassin.PNG

[edit] Image:Hardiman.jpg

[edit] Image:RosieMalek-Yonan.jpg

[edit] Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif

[edit] Image:FIBAoc08 logo.gif

[edit] Image:Vinometer.1.jpg

[edit] Image:Yves_Saint-Laurent.jpg

[edit] Image:Psicotomimetismo.JPG

[edit] Image:Scan0001.JPG

[edit] Image:Woman_clitoris.jpg

[edit] Image:Female_genitalia,_with_hand_(1654).jpg

[edit] Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg

[edit] Image:Can_you_lick_it_!_(Klashorst).jpg

[edit] Image:Tims_wife.jpg

[edit] Image:TESIS DOCTORAL.pdf

[edit] Image:Archivos Universitarios en el Perú.pdf

[edit] Image:ResumeBLANK-1-.pdf

[edit] Image:Frank Hecker.pdf

[edit] Image:Parque podocarpus.pdf

[edit] Image:M24asociados.pdf

[edit] Image:PARADOJAS HIDROSTÁTICAS.pdf

[edit] Image:Aiwass_foto1.JPG

[edit] Image:MusicIsOurWay.jpg

[edit] Image:Maradonahand3.jpg

[edit] Image:Lizas_Labiaplastie.jpg

[edit] Image:Gotta_stand_up.jpg

[edit] Image:HUT_students_in_ao_dai.jpg

[edit] Image:Fellatio-real.jpg

[edit] Image:Waterhouse_Echo_and_Narcissus.jpg

[edit] Image:Strudwick_-_A_Golden_Thread.jpg

[edit] Image:Lorrain_-_Ascagne_(1682).jpg

[edit] Image:Biografia_felinto.JPG

[edit] Image:Ecology_Ernst_Haeckel_1.svg

[edit] Image:Karpas&Co.pdf

[edit] Image:DEmo ESPANOL.pdf