Commons:Deletion requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Deletion (all)
Candidates Deletion requests Speedy deletion Copyright violations Duplicates Unknown Universally replaced Other speedy deletions Incomplete requests Undeletion requests Deletion archives Undeletion archives

This page is for deletion requests where users request the deletion of media files or pages. This is for requests which require community discussion prior to eventual deletion. Obvious copyright violations, duplicate images, and incorrectly-named images should be handled through the speedy deletion process rather than listed here.

Please note: The procedures on this page differ significantly from those of other Wikimedia projects, namely the English Wikipedia's Images and media for deletion, so all users should read the following instructions carefully. Also note: Arguments about copyright status are always more compelling than votes.

Overview

The Wikimedia Commons deletion requests page is to collect arguments in favor of and opposing deletion. When a debate has reached consensus or when it is likely that no additional arguments will be added, an administrator will close the discussion and determine whether the file should be deleted. For clear cases, it might happen within a few hours, but more complicated cases can go on for weeks.

Further remarks:

• For requesting deletion of multiple files (mass nomination), please see Help:Mass deletion request.
• Do not directly list at "Commons:Deletion requests".
• RFD may not be used for mass deletion requests that are in reality an attempt to change the policy of the Commons, or are made to purposely disrupt Commons to make a point. Please use the Village Pump for discussion of policy.

Discussions

• Current deletion requests: these deletion requests are either new or have been made recently
• Older Discussions: these discussions are still OPEN and require attention! Please comment/close them if you are able. (Take care with large requests such as templates.)
• Old Discussions for archived requests and discussions.

How to list "deletion requests"

{{delete|REASON FOR DELETION}}

{{Commons:Deletion requests/Image:FILE-NAME.JPG}}

{{subst:idw|Image:FILE-NAME.JPG}} ~~~~

1. ↑ For example, add {{delete|All photos of User:Mike are suspected copyvios|Images of Mike}} to all images in this series.

Removing files to be deleted

Other deletion procedures

Pages or files which are clearly inappropriate for Wikimedia Commons may qualify for speedy deletion or ultimatum deletion and do not need to be listed here. More in detail instructions can be found at Commons:Deletion guidelines. In brief:

1. Files missing a valid source get tagged {{subst:nsd}} and files missing a valid license get tagged {{subst:nld}}. If these problems you specified with the tags do not get resolved within 7 days an admin will delete such tagged files on sight.
2. A clear copyvio will be tagged {{copyvio}}. Insert your strong reasons. ~~~~ and will be deleted on sight by an admin.
3. If an image is an exact duplicate or scaled-down version of an existing version tag it {{duplicate|Image:existing image.jpg}}.
4. If you uploaded identical images using wrong or mistyped names, tag the incorrectly named files with {{badname|Image:Bettername.jpg}} (other own files you want to get deleted get listed the usual way at the deletion request. State your reasons and the fact that you are the uploader but be aware that you have no right for a deletion of your files; generally the files will be kept in case they meet our criteria).
5. It is rarely necessary to delete category pages. In the vast majority of cases, simply remove all the files from the category, and then redirect the old category to the new one (using {{Category redirect}} with |Other-Category-Name without prefix).
6. General licensing policy issues and reviews of license templates get resolved at Commons talk:Licensing.
7. Superseded images will not be deleted per discussion and consensus.

Appeal

To appeal debates of image not deleted, you might first want to discuss with the admin who closed the discussion. If you do not get the response you want, appealing deleted images can be done at Commons:Undeletion requests.

If the decision was correctly based on the current licensing and Commons:Project scope pages, you should express your dissatisfaction on a respective page.

Instructions for administrators

In general, requests can be closed after seven days. Deletion requests for obvious copyright violations can be closed earlier. Problematic or complex requests (such as highly used templates) can wait longer, even months is not unusual.

Administrators are encouraged to check whether the uploader was notified on their talk page of the pending deletion request, unless the image is an obvious violation, in which case the image can be speedy deleted.

How to close the discussion

Note: The easiest way is to use DelReqHandler available as a gadget under "my preferences" (Firefox only).

1. Add {{delh}} just above the header.
2. Then add a line using ---- at the bottom of the request.
3. Write the concluding statement (Deleted, Kept, Redirect, Merged, etc) and possibly an explanation. Sign.
4. Then add {{delf}} at the bottom of the request.

See this example.

Discussions older than seven days

• Commons:Deletion requests/Older Discussions: these discussions are still OPEN and require attention! Please comment/close them if you are able. (Take care with large requests such as templates.)
• Commons:Deletion requests/Old for archived requests and discussions.

Recent discussions

Please force the server to re-render this page by purging its cache if the most recent discussions do not appear below.

September 3

Image:Jesusvazquez.JPG

Image not located at cited source, no evidence that the site releases images to CC Ytoyoda (talk) 00:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cartao_de_acesso_sky.jpg

Copyvio of SKY card? Sdrtirs (talk) 01:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Keep pd-ineligible text. -Nard the Bard 19:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Joelioeviviane.jpg

I don't believe this is uploader's work. It looks that it is a promotional or a screenshot. Sdrtirs (talk) 01:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, very unlikely to be uploader's work. TimVickers (talk) 20:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Kroatien.jpg

Image:USN Midshipman Insignia.jpg

duplicate and slightly lesser quality of Image:USN Midshipman Insignia.png -Officer781 (talk) 09:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Locations of cities

I haven' bothered to look up any guidelines as I take it this is a pretty clear-cut matter. Surely, this category should be named Category:Locations of cities in Pakistan or something similar? -meco (talk) 10:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC) do what ever u want to do with category for improvement. but don't delete maps as it take long time to create them--Faraz Ahmad (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pancràtor de taüll.jpg

the first upload has a typo error: Pancràtor-->Pantocràtor. So I've uloaded it again. I would like this version to be deleted.. --Espencat

Image:Baltoro-GIV-Chogolisa.jpg

duplicate of an already existing image Rupert Pupkin (talk) 13:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:OJ 1945-2008.jpg

This photo is own work, but the photographs on the covers are not and cannot be uploaded under a free license without permission. Reason for speedy deletion added by User:81.234.235.4, 23:02, 28 August 2008. Speedy changed to delete by User:Pieter Kuiper, 23:11, 28 August 2008.

As the photographer behind this photo, my firm opinion is that this picture - with its arrangement of three different magazine covers, placed in various angles on a chosen backgrund - is a work of its own merits, not just a reproduction of copyrighted material. I think it can be compared to the two photos to the right which both include reproductions of copyrighted material (the photo on the movie poster, the artwork on the matchbox respectivly) but are mainly "new works" anyway. /FredrikT (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I took away the "speedy" tag, because this is not att all an obvious case. I would be inclined to think that this could be kept. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Foyer.jpg

likely copyvio + rights of the creator of the room-style (perhaps) abf /talk to me/ 13:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Rights of the interior decorator?? That sounds like something new. The other images of the Théâtre du Ranelagh by this uploader have the higher resolution more typical of own work. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 14:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Baquerizo.gif

likely copyvio abf /talk to me/ 14:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Palin with kitty.jpg

Photo is not obviously photoshopped, as the note states. What is the point of having photoshopped pictures in Commons? I think it's especially important that we not have photoshopped pictures of major political figures during a campaign. Nor is it "realistically useful for an educational purpose." --Yekrats (talk) 19:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• The photo is a talking point in an archived discussion. I think the image is fine if appropriately labelled. It's hardly libellous or personality damaging. See also en:Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_August_31#Image:Palin_with_kitty.jpg -Nard the Bard 20:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
• How is this image within commons scope? It don't believe it serves a legitimate educational purpose which couldn't be better met by something less likely to cause confusion. I think this should be deleted. --Gmaxwell (talk) 17:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  • It's used. That makes it in scope. -Nard the Bard 19:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
    • It's not used by one of the projects. It referenced in a talk page archive where its usage in the article was rejected. That shouldn't qualify the image for automatic "in scope", the purpose of the automatic in scope is an observation that media being used in the educational products is obviously educational. Media which has been rejected by those projects doesn't qualify, even if the image was used on a talk page as part of rejecting it. --Gmaxwell (talk) 19:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
• Delete "Should realistically be useful..." - it's not. naerii 20:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:ChaitanyaB.jpg

Source ("self-made") and license (PD-old) seem contradictory Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Official_portrait_johnso.JPG

Image source by the uploader claims that it's from City of Melbourne and if this is the case it's a copyvio as there is no free-use[1] Bidgee (talk) 21:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rottepolderplein.jpeg

The stated release on the image page doesn't seem to be equivalent to {{attribution}}. Patrícia ^msg 21:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Keep template:Beeldbank is used on hundreds of files. A nomination for one of them is hardly the way to challenge it. -Nard the Bard 02:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  • You are correct. At the time I nominated the image, I did not notice that this was a template (I thought it was "{{attribution}} + additional info". So, I extend this request to the template and images tagged by it. Patrícia ^msg 12:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
    • I tagged the template and moved this request to a more appropriate name. Patrícia ^msg 12:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've been asked to explain in more detail why I think this template has problems. The wording is "[...] No extra costs are associated with copyright, although it is mandatory to acknowledge the source with each publication". I think that uses such as production of derivative works is not explicit. I'll be happy if I'm wrong... Patrícia ^msg 13:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Swiped_Football_Strap.JPG

Ew, a used jockstrap. Unused file, outside project scope. -Nard the Bard 22:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:12_lead_generated_inferior_MI.JPG

Would this output be copyrighted? ViperSnake151 (talk) 22:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes but the other question is by whom? The uploader claims self-made and since he's an established uploader I have no reason to disbelieve him. -Nard the Bard 23:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Adana panaroma.jpg

[2] Image use rules for other web-sites: "Site isminin belirtilmesi ve fotoğrafçıdan izin alınması!" means write the web-site name and photographer permission. No permission. --Machiavelli ^talk 22:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gmina Lichnowy flaga.svg

file has bad colors (not from Coat of arms), bad size not 8:5 like a law says.

I've fixed it in image:POL gmina Lichnowy flag.svg

Uchwała Nr III/32/2002 Rady Gminy Lichnowy z dnia 30 grudnia 2002 r. w sprawie uchwalenia Statutu Gminy Lichnowy

--JDavid (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jezz.gif

"Used with permission" is not the same as releasing something under a free license. "Usado con permiso" no es lo mismo que divulgar algo bajo una licencia libre. -Nard the Bard 23:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

same picture can be found from web http://cuatroamigosmcdolmar.blogspot.com/2008/03/llibres-noticies-del-nou-llibre-de-la.html, so please delete--Motopark (talk) 03:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

September 4

Image:Sasha_as_LadyAgnew.jpg

Violates Laurie Johnson's copyright. -Nard the Bard 02:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Note - uploader appears to be connected with the San Diego Art Institute, and has uploaded several other SDAI images as well. I've informed him of the need for OTRS permission from the artists, and tagged the other uploads. --dave pape (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gmina_wasniow_flaga.svg

wrong pattern of the flag. Fixed in Image:POL gmina Waśniów flag.svg. Flag's descpription was created in 2003, so this file has no sense. JDavid (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Yulia_Tymoshenko_press_conference.jpg

I could not find the image source and therefore I could not find the proof for the license. There is also no OTRS permission. ALE! ¿…? 08:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• Delete The photograph seems to have a copyright notice in the lower right corner. Unfortunately I cannot read it, but it makes me doubt the free license. -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 15:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Arout.jpg

doubt own work, no source. Probably from 1950s, on Commons since 2006 and used. Yann (talk) 09:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fleischer sup film.jpg

While the films may have fallen out of copy right, this image has at least two problem with being listed as PD. First, it appears to be a derivative work, cover art for a DVD or VHS release of a compilation the films. The derivative work will have it's own copyright based on its date of production and publication. Second, it falls under the same reasoning laid out at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Donaldduck-thespiritof43-2.jpg: the copyright for the character on which the films were based is still intact and valid. --J Greb (talk) 10:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Delete. The cover art is clearly not in the Fleischers' style, and so most likely copyrighted by some other artist. --dave pape (talk) 14:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vera_barclay.JPG

No real source, photo from 1920; no evidence for PD-Old. Lupo 11:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Source from Italian Wikipedia project

The Vera Barclay's image come from: Italian Wikipedia project

Descrizione=Vera Barclay in una insolita espressione triste Source=Esperienze e progetti

Date=1920

License:

This image (or other media file) is in the public domain because its copyright has expired. This applies to the United States, Canada, the European Union and those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Côte d'Ivoire has a general copyright term of 99 years and Honduras has 75 years, but they do implement that rule of the shorter term. العربية | Asturianu | Български | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | English | Ελληνικά | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | فارسی | Français | Gaeilge | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Kurdî / كوردی | Lietuvių | Magyar | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (nynorsk)‬ | Македонски | Bahasa Melayu | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Suomi | Sámegiella | Türkçe | ‪中文(简体)‬ | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | 粵語 | +/-

Licenza d’uso= Quest'immagine è nel pubblico dominio in quanto il suo copyright è scaduto. La norma si applica all'Unione europea, agli Stati Uniti e a tutti quei paesi in cui il copyright scade 70 anni dopo la morte dell'autore. Un file con questa licenza può essere reso disponibile a Wikipedia in altre lingue e agli altri progetti Wikimedia se caricato su Wikimedia Commons. Qualunque utente può effettuare il trasferimento. Lista delle immagini trasferibili Puoi farti aiutare dal CommonsHelper. Una volta trasferito il file, inserisci in questa pagina:

Template:NowCommons

--Scouts2012 (talk) 00:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• I know. As I wrote: no real source (what's "Esperienze e progetti" (meaning "Experiences and projects"??), and no evidence for PD-Old. Lupo 09:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alfred_rosenburg.jpg

Source does not make any statement on copyright status, this does not qualify for PD-USGov. It is possible, that this was taken by a press photographer at the Nuremberg Trials. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 15:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Image is from US government archives, and the Nuremburg Trials were run by the US government. A search of nara.gov finds many cataloged images of the three individuals in the picture at the trials, but this particular one is not in the ARC digital collection. -Nard the Bard 02:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Carl_Alexander_von_Martius.jpg

Unknown author, no source website, and date "before 1920". No evidence for PD-old. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 16:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, delete it. The photo was originally & wrongly labelled as Paul Mendelsohn, who lived 1841-1880. This is clearly not a 40 year old man. Instead it shows Carl Alexander von Martius, the partner of Paul Mendelsohn in founding the chemical & photographic company Agfa. Martius lived until 1920, thus the new most recent year it was taken. The photo was originally uploaded by user Plumpaquatsch from de:WP. I merely tried to relabel it correctly. --Minderbinder (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:N639815604_281663_2145.jpg

out of COM:SCOPE, eventually intended for hoax/vanity articles. Túrelio (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:San_Miguel_Real_Estate_+_Cats_014.jpg

Low quality, out of focus and little possibility for any use. Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• Keep This is a prime example of "mis en scene" and it is very much in scope. It could serve as a userpage lolcat (see Category:lolcats for examples of in scope lolcats). -Nard the Bard 21:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gspcpocast.jpg

image used for an article that was deleted on ENWP Lucasbfr (talk) 20:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep potentially useful - we are a media repository, we don't go around deleting things solely because they are unused.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ameth_Ordoñez4.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE, as obviously a holiday image. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ameth_Ordoñez5.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE, as obviously a private holiday image. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ameth_Ordoñez3.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE, as obviously a private holiday image. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ameth_Ordoñez2.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE, as obviously being a private holiday image. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ameth_Ordoñez.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE, as obviously a holiday image; even not used on his userpage. Túrelio (talk) 21:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Carlosarmando.png

as of COM:SCOPE. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ranakhan.jpg

as of COM:SCOPE. Though categorizied under Personal Images, not used on any Wikimedia or user page. Túrelio (talk) 21:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Perseus Turning Phineas and his Followers to Stone.jpg

Incorrect name, copied the name from a source that was wrong. Should be "Phineus". Yohan euan o4 (talk) 22:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pagerank.PNG

screenshot of propritary software 207.161.23.223 23:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Im