Commons:Deletion requests/File:Apices du moyen-âge.PNG
Metadata claims the image is from 976, which is clearly bogus, since it contains dates from after that, along with modern typography. It appears to be by the anonymous author of the now-dead website encyclopedie-universelle.com. As I pointed out in an edit comment in 2017, the rather prominent article en:Arabic numerals has been using the image for some time with text that misleadingly implies it (like the table above it) was created by Jean-Étienne Montucla in the 1700s. This is a useful image, however, and I'd like to see it changed to a lo-res version with corrected metadata (and an intro on en:Arabic numerals that makes its provenance clear), rather than outright deletion. Dan Harkless (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Keep, obviously, and no replacing with a lowres version. Dan Harkless is very welcome to further correct the filepage, to {{Withdraw}} this dangerous DR (as it can be used by deletionist admins to further their cause), and to keep content discussion regarding the use of this image in en:Arabic numerals at en:Talk:Arabic numerals (incl. about the size this image should displayed at thereon). -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination. I had read a Google translation of the encyclopedie-universelle.com page that links to this before nominating, and it doesn't at all make it clear who created this image or when, and if it was indeed from the 1800s rather than something the webmaster put together in the modern era. However, my main concern was the misleading use of the image on en:Arabic numerals, and I've now removed it from there, with Tuválkin's concurrence, so if this is a copyvio, I'm content for the former encyclopedie-universelle webmaster to take any further steps on that, if they so desire. I am going to put a question mark after the "circa 1870" date claim, though, as that is not established by the encyclopedie-universelle page, and appears to be just a guess. Disclaimer: I am by no means an SME on this subject. --Dan Harkless (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- It was a guess, and a bad one at that (I’m not a SME either, at all!): On a closer inspection it doesn’t look like what can be seen in late 19th cent. encyclopedias but rather something created with MS Word in the 1990s and printed in cheap inkjet, then faxed or digitized with a handheld black-and-white (not greyscale!) scanner. Thanks for your continued work, Dan Harkless. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:06, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: PD-ineligible. --Yann (talk) 17:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
