File:Bischofjoachimreinelt.jpg

OTRS ticket number missing. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

It's a problem with CommonsHelper. The missing information can be found in de:Datei:Bischofjoachimreinelt.jpg. --Leyo 08:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I added now the missing information including the OTRS-Ticketnumber according the prior de: image. Now:  Keep of corse. --JuTa (talk) 13:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Leyo 13:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Uexheimlimekiln.jpg

OTRS ticket missing. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

It's a problem with CommonsHelper. The missing information can be found in de:Datei:392.jpg. --Leyo 08:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I used CommonsHelper to upload it from Deutschopedia. I am now attempting to rectify the problem........Hmmm, it seems that the OTRS ticket is already there. Why is there still a deletion request?Kelisi (talk) 13:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The OTRS template missed the parameter(s). You have to copy it from the source text in de.wikipedia. --Leyo 14:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Fixed transfer. DieBuche (talk) 14:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Camp_nac_2010.png

OTRS missing since March. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Wknight94 ^talk 14:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Larry_Graycup.jpg

Derivative work of copyrighted cup. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. But more because it's an apparent copyvio photo, and has been tagged OTRS pending for almost five months. Wknight94 ^talk 14:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Vogelpark_Walsrode_-_Freiflughalle_-_Ciconia_abdimii_02_ies.jpg

undefined 195.229.237.39 15:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Mbdortmund (talk) 15:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:CoryWilliams.gif

I've uploaded this picture to the wrong page. Rebecca Sanchez (talk) 11:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Havang(nl): Uploader request: User request; wrong upload

File:Kit_right_arm_thinwhtestripes2.png

wrong file name. uploaded already correct name version Tbnumber1 (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:Kit right arm thinwhitestripes2.png -- Common Good (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Kit_left_arm_thinwhtestripes2.png

wrong file name. uploaded already correct name version Tbnumber1 (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:Kit left arm thinwhitestripes2.png -- Common Good (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Akins_crest.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Adair_clan_crest.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Adam_crest_badge.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Aikenhead_clan_crest.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Ainslie_crest_badge.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Allardice_crest_badge.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Auchinleck_crest_badge.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Balfour_clan_crest.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Bannatyne_clan_crest.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_Akins_crest_badge.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_abercromby.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_abernethy.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_bannerman.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_baird.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_baillie.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_arthur.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_arbuthnott.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_anstruther.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_anderson.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Clan_agnew.jpg

After investigating the source of the image I received the following email from david@family-crests.com: Hi These are our images, drawn by ourselves, for which we have the original layered artwork. We do not allow authorship to be claimed on any of our work and is a violation of copyright. I would like to know who this person is. Thank you for enlightening us about this 194.217.0.4 16:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Huib talk ^{Abigor @ meta} 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

File:My_Chest.jpg

Author request; all uses in mainspace have been removed or replaced. Kayau (talk) 05:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Túrelio: Author request; all uses in mainspace have been removed or replaced.

File:Prunk.jpeg

Outdated picture, not used on my User:Prunk page anymore -- Prunk (talk) 13:26, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Personal image, deleted per user request. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 13:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

File:JanPrunk1.jpg

Outdated picture, not in use for my User page anymore --Prunk (talk) 13:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Personal image, deleted per user request. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 13:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Taylor war crimes captioned.jpg

on the source page it is credited as "AP Photo/Rob Keeris" --Gumruch (talk) 20:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep American Department of state... what thing you? --77.48.29.30 21:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• Delete. Per nom. Third-party photo. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep Not, your must proof if are this "Third-party photo". Im say "department of state" --77.48.29.30 21:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it is from Rob Keeris for/via AP – Associated Press. No proof of authorship by a US Government worker on the page. --Gumruch (talk) 22:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Delete per Gumruch -- Herby (Vienna) (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 Delete Really, you got right. But, im seaching new images of Taylor at Flickr. Im provisionally reupload with blank file, and if im take some free image, im reupload that again.

Thnaks for help.. --77.48.29.30 09:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Per nom. Martin H. (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Solar power tower with steam turbine.png

Cargo-cult engineering. The uploader has thrown together a number of pieces without understanding what they do (eg. the "superheater"). As a result, this diagram depicts an impossible machine and has no educational use. --Carnildo (talk) 00:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Delete or perhaps, edit and repair. The basic principle for this one is reasonable, its the details that are the problem. The "boiler" appears to be lifted from File:Locomotive fire tube boiler schematic.png and the turbine is KVDP's usual "waterwheel with crank drive", both of which need to be simply discarded and started again.

Solar towers are interesting topics and a schematic (which we don't currently have) would be useful. Obviously this should be accurately drawn. Although single circuit water/steam plants aren't perhaps the most practically efficient for new designs, they're a simple clear schematic to draw.(El-Wakil, M.M. Powerplant Technology, p. p.544 ISBN 0072871024) The following need correction:

• Show the boiler symbolically, as a diagrammatic zig-zag. This is a system schematic, not construction plans
• Move the machinery down the tower. I know of no large tower designs with generators up the tower - these aren't wind turbines.
• Draw the turbine symbolically, as the usual trapezium. Don't over-detail this, that paddlewheel and crankshaft is ridiculous.
• Don't forget the condenser and circulation pumps.
• Lose the water supply, valve gear, gearbox and anything that you think "ought to be there" and that you don't have a solid reference for its existence, location, and pictorial representation.

Nothing from http://www.appropedia.org should ever be used at Commons or Wikipedia. That site is a total fantasy by the clueless. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Delete: per above. Globbet (talk) 21:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Out of COM:SCOPE. Misleading, therefore not educational content. SV1XV (talk) 19:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag_of_of_Afghanistan,_1991-92.gif

Presumably a flag never existed: 1)a black-white-green flag was not adopted before 1992 2)There are numerous variants of the flag adopted in 1992, but no source mention this flag here 3) even the uploader himself is in doubt if this flag ever existed and does not know a source Antemister (talk) 09:28, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept and tagged {{Fictitious flag}} SV1XV (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Julio_Maldonado_Mourelle_retrato.jpg

unused personal photo - out of scope Santosga (talk) 22:26, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. ZooFari 07:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Juemaguinho.jpg

unused screenshot of a personal website - out of scope Santosga (talk) 01:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Van_Mildert_Boat_Club_Crest.jpg

Logo of some sort, used in a now deleted article on en.wikipedia. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Chriskirkland.JPG

Appears to be a screenshot of a TV broadcast, based on quality/setting. Ytoyoda (talk) 01:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Zayatte.PNG

Image quality and size suggest this is a screenshot of a copyrighted broadcast. Ytoyoda (talk) 01:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:JuglarArgentina.jpg

unused logo of an Argentinian rock band with no notability and no article in any wiki project - out of scope (see this diff promptly reverted in wiki es) Santosga (talk) 02:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:XMoney.png

This is Copyrighted Suporte.gamuza (talk) 03:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• I doubt it can be copyrighted. Looks PD-ineligible (textlogo) to me. Now whether it is notable in any way that puts it in scope is another matter. - Jmabel ! talk 06:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Brett_Gurewitz_of_Bad_Religion.jpg

Author's request. Copyright has changed. Ecoria (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep CC licenses cannot be revoked. --PaterMcFly (talk) 05:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree with PaterMcFly here. Keep. - Jmabel ! talk 06:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep per Pater--DieBuche (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:30, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Brian_Rowland_CPFC_USA.jpg

OTRS ticket missing. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Foto_casual.jpg

Unused personal photo, outside scope. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Kxh.jpg

Unused personal photo, outside scope. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Airtecnics-production-plant-2.jpg

OTRS not received. Low resolution, outside scope. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Tourette's_long_small.OGG

No OTRS since March. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I uploaded this file and have no problem with it being deleted. I uploaded a few similar files around that time and would like to delete all of them except File:Tourette's tic long medium 192kbps.OGG which is being used at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome. Trouble is, I don't know where to find them or how to delete :) I'd really appreciate it if someone could do the honours. Anthonyhcole (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Chelita.jpg

Unused, outside scope. No OTRS since March. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:The_demon_.png

No OTRS received, outside scope, copyvio of Strong Bad. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:The_demon_with_peak_.png

No OTRS received, outside scope, copyvio of Strong Bad. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

wtf are you talking about? OTRS? outside scope? copyvio? strong bad? Eric Carr Fan (talk) 14:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

It's not outside the scope of Wikimedia Commons. It's been in use on en.WP since the beginning of July at least.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• It's occurred to me this is supposed to be KISS. And it looks like own work. OTRS would not bee needed in that case. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 17:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Sofievka.jpg

OTRS permission is from photographer, not the designer of the diagram. No evidence that this work is in the public domain. Dcoetzee (talk) 05:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Flicken001.JPEG

advertisement, out of scope --by Màñü飆¹5 ^talk 05:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Oct6-0840thAnnivNewsstand.jpg

At the very least, mislicenced & false claim of "own work". Presumably a copyvio. Jmabel ! talk 05:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Chromium.OsTan.codiemorgan.draft.png

Uploading in lower resolution instead - in order to allow thumbnail generation ; I am the original artist. Codiemorgan (talk) 06:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Farshidmoussavi.jpg

Flick user Kolyakolia is hardly Armin Linke. I don't think the picture was really made by that user. deerstop. 08:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Step_2_Correct.svg

New version is File:Rubiks Step 2.svg.Se0808 (talk) 09:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Please, say, as I may nominate file for fast deleting. Se0808 (talk) 09:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Medallas2010.jpg

Derivative work of possibly copyrighted designs. Eusebius (talk) 10:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:David-jones.jpg

The photo is used on http://www.deeside.ac.uk/about-us/principal.php and comes under the Deeside website copyright mark and would need a verifiable release into the public domain to stay here. Fæ (talk) 10:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The release into public domain has now been verified in OTRS and the image tagged appropriately. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick work, thanks. Fæ (talk) 15:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Russia-Moscow-Moscow_State_University.jpg

No FoP in Russia. 84.62.215.188 10:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Comment Please make aggregate deletion request for all images of this building. Also will be good idea if you'll find out architects and their date of life information. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The main architect of the depicted building is Lev Rudnev who died in 1956. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Comment FoP regulations come with restrictions in other countrys as well. In Germany for example there is some kind of non-derivative clause included. Question here is: is non-commercial-restriction too much or not. I have a strong bias to keep those pictures, for a simple reason: the picture is under free licence and therefore fine. Any problems with the picture caused by the FoP regulations will get lost when the displayed object itself runs out of copyright terms. We will then have a free picture of a free object. --Wiggum (talk) 19:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

For this we have a Category:Undeletion requests category tree for the deletion requests of media that become free in some years. In this case, we could put this DR into (the not yet existing) Category:Undelete in 2027. In regard to the restriction to non-commercial use only, we feel rather strongly at Commons about this freedom, see COM:L. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Delete. There is a second restiction in Russian copyright law's FoP: except where portrayal of the work by such method is the basic object of that reproduction. sугсго 10:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Russia-Moscow-Moscow State University.jpg

No permission. "Photo made by my brother, Alex Zelenko. Taken September 25, 2005." Загрузал в Рувику участник EugeneZelenko. Dogad75 (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Kept: Speedily kept per COM:GOF. --AFBorchert (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

File:6_grande.jpg

Seems to me a professional photograph with a caption different from uploaders name. Doubtful own work Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 11:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Lkgmcrkr.jpeg

Source unclear, PD status not verifiable Fæ (talk) 12:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Tabelul_periodic.JPG

Obvious copyright violation. Luispihormiguero (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Bert_Hellinger.jpg

This photo is likely to originate from The Hellinger Institute of Western Pennsylvania’s page, here one can see a high res version. I think, flickr user wasn’t entitled to release it under a free license. Blacklake (talk) 12:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Priels

now Category:Priele as the correct plural form -- 08:42, August 6, 2010 C.Löser

Cleaned up by      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Publiek.jpg

bad quality (poor size/resolution) Ben4Wiki (talk) 13:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:JuicyGrapefruit_Logo_2006.png

logo of a Belgian musical group with no notability, deleted three times here fr:Juicy Grapefruit for no notability/autopromo Santosga (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:JuicyGrapefruit_Live_060422_RabbitRocker.jpg

photo of a Belgian musical group with no notability, deleted three times here fr:Juicy Grapefruit for no notability/autopromo - out of scope Santosga (talk) 14:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_A_cañiza.jpg

bad quality (poor size/resolution) Ben4Wiki (talk) 14:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Maker_Faire_2008_San_Mateo_116.JPG

Freedom_of_panorama#United_States JN466 14:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment There are many more such images in the Maker Faire categories. I would be grateful if an admin or copyright expert with a spare hour could look through them. --JN466 14:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Localite.jpg

bad quality (poor size/resolution) Ben4Wiki (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Keep In use, and is intentionally that small as an example image. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 20:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:28, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Emirates_Crown

No images. 84.62.215.188 15:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Emirates_Crown

No images. 84.62.215.188 15:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Skriðuklaustur.jpg

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland. It was originally designed by Prof Fritz Höger. He died 1949. --Fingalo (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Susan_B._Anthony_List.jpg

The logo meets the threshold of originality, the license tag is incorrect. Also it has a fair use rational - fair use is not allowed on Commons Martin H. (talk) 15:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, this is speediable. Just ask the uploader to upload as fair use on en.wiki. Seems like the upload here was a mistake, or the user doesn't understand our image use policies.-Andrew c (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Julien1.jpg

unused personal image - out of scope Santosga (talk) 16:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Amada44  ^{talk to me} 13:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Kópavogskirkja 2.JPG

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland. It was originally designed by Hörður Bjarnason. He died 1990. --Fingalo (talk) 16:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Kópavogskirkja2.jpg

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland. It was originally designed by Hörður Bjarnason. He died 1990. --Fingalo (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Smáralind Panorama 1.JPG

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland --Fingalo (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Smáralind Panorama 2.JPG

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland --Fingalo (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Pacelli12.jpg

Very questionable that the copyright - not the image or a copy but explicitely the intelectual property right - "was donated" to the uploader. Copyright transfer requires a written form, this should be forwarded to OTRS. Owning a copy or having received a copy as gift does not make one the copyright holder. Martin H. (talk) 17:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

He explicitly stated that he "owned the original" that was given to him as a gift. He did not say that he received "a copy as a gift" but that he received the "original", so he was the owner of the master copy, and therefore all rights therein thereafter. History2007. History2007 (talk) 18:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

To prevent further argumentation based on this wrong interpretion (and/or speculation): Owning the original negative does not mean that copyright was transfered, transfer of the work ≠ transfer of copyright. Owning the original work does not allow you to upload a reproduction here under a free license unless the creator had the copyright transfered to you or agreed to the license. --Martin H. (talk) 18:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• Delete. It is quite clear that the uploader doesn't own the copyright. First, in its context, his expression "the original" likely refers merely to the printed copy from which he copied the digital file. That printed copy would be the "original" only in relation to the digital copy. It is unlikely that he meant that he was given the actual original negative created by the photographer. Anyway, even in the hypothesis that he somehow obtained the negative after the creation of the photograph, that still would not suddenly nullify the copyright of the actual copyright owner and it would not transform the uploader into the copyright owner. It is very unlikely that the Vatican authorities signed with the uploader a contract of explicit donation of copyright. However, there could still be the matter of the short copyright term in the Italian (and probably Vatican) copyright law for non-artistic, ordinary photos, but this particular photo looks more like a commissioned professional-style photo, so its copyright is probably not expired. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Smáralind Panorama 3.JPG

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland --Fingalo (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Smáralind Panorama 4.JPG

Image is only free for non-commercial use until 70 years following the architect's death per COM:FOP#Iceland --Fingalo (talk) 19:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Img_2898.jpg

no source, not even the most basic claim of own work Prosfilaes (talk) 19:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Julienfonck.jpg

unused photo of a Swiss musician with no notability/vanity as decided here fr:Julien Fonck - out of scope Santosga (talk) 22:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Juliounidad.gif

unused and unnecessary formula, was used here es:Julio (unidad) but later replaced by a much better and more adequate formula predefinition Santosga (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Fire_stations_in_Dobre,_Masovian_Voivodeship

blank category 217.190.224.180 23:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Julian_iversen.jpg

unused personal image - out of scope Santosga (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Jameslwoodward: Per Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Julian_iversen.jpg

Category:Skyscrapers_in_Dubai

No FoP in the UAE. 84.62.215.188 15:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep sorry, but this DR is just nonsense. 84.62.215.188 nominates ~600 very different files (per CatScan2) at a single time without any file-by-file analysis. Trycatch (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep I wouldn't say "nonsense". Since there is no FOP in the UAE, any image that fit this category is almost certainly a copyvio DW. The key is "almost" -- there may be a very few we can keep. I suggest that 84.62.215.188 go through them building by building and do separate {{Delete}}s for each building.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Files, with the exception of those of de minimis, etc. should be nominated individually or preferably by mass deletion. ZooFari 03:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:The_Address_Downtown_Dubai

No FoP in the UAE. 84.62.215.188 16:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep As above, these will all, or almost all, be copyvio DWs, but you must list them out in a mass delete, put {{|tl|delete}} (referring to the mass delete) on each one, and notify all the uploaders.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Files, with the exception of those of de minimis, etc. should be nominated individually or preferably by mass deletion. ZooFari 03:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Jumeirah_Lake_Towers

No FoP in the UAE. 84.62.215.188 16:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. The files, with the exception of those of de minimis, etc. should be nominated individually or preferably by mass deletion. ZooFari 03:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Berlaymont_building

No FoP in Belgium. 84.62.215.188 18:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• You should made a real mass DR. I.e. -- filter copyvio from innocent shots (like this), notify uploaders, place DR tag on each image. Trycatch (talk) 14:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. The files, with the exception of those of de minimis, etc. should be nominated individually or preferably by mass deletion. ZooFari 03:56, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Barret_.50_Cal_Mexican_special_forces.jpg

Probably webrip. Most of the files by Rahlgd seem to be unfree. Multichill (talk) 22:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Delete Known copyvio uploader under bad "own work" claim, no need to waste time finding the exact source. Photo looks professional, also note that non-standard resolution could be the indirect evidence that a watermark was accurately removed by cropping (as in DR below). Trycatch (talk) 00:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Wich "DR below"?--Sanandros (talk) 22:34, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:APC-70.jpg. Trycatch (talk) 12:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:APC-70.jpg

Probably webrip. Most of the files by Rahlgd seem to be unfree. Multichill (talk) 22:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any proof to prove that this picture is unfree? Because as far as I know simply saying "The uploader uploaded some unfree pictures" is not strong enough evidence (mostly because it's circumstantial). Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, looks like I didn't link his talkpage. Take a look at en:User talk:Rahlgd. Multichill (talk) 09:04, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

So? Just because this user uploaded some unfree pictures in the past doesn't automatically make this a copyright violation. It simply means that there's a POSSIBILITY of copyright violation. However such a POSSIBILITY is also present in case of many other pictures uploaded by many other users but that does NOT make them copyright violations. Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 11:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Delete . Trycatch (talk) 00:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Order Friendship of Peoples.jpg

The order falls under {{PD-RU-exempt}}. The photograph itself is however not necessarily PD. The file's description fails to address this. --AFBorchert (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Delete. It was a common medal, so easily replaceable. Plus, the source URL is dead. (Uploader). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 01:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. CommonsDelinker will replace uses with some other image from the category. ZooFari 02:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Brocks_wish_trip.JPG

Derivative work, out of scope. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 10:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Delete in scope, but dw. Trycatch (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. ZooFari 04:15, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Main_building_of_Moscow_State_University

No FoP in Russia. 84.62.215.188 18:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep This does not justify for deletion of the whole category. When was the building errected? Looks pre-WW2. --PaterMcFly (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Built in 1949-1955. Please, give us a couple of days, we'll save some images in local ru.wiki as fair-use Rubin16 (talk) 17:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep. Anonim-vandal. Photos of Interiors for 100% keep. No reason for deleted. --Pauk (talk) 08:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. The files, with the exception of those of de minimis, etc. should be nominated individually or preferably by mass deletion. ZooFari 03:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Ampallang3_stealer1.jpg

I, the copyright holder of this photo, would like to remove it from all Wiki sites. 72.174.36.75 04:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• Warning to anyone about to click through: definitely "not safe for work". - Jmabel ! talk 06:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
• I'm inclined to delete an unused image of male genitalia as a courtesy if the uploader/photographer wants it deleted. However, what is the reason to think this anonymous IP is the "copyright holder"? - Jmabel ! talk 06:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Ah, I see that the uploader wants all of his stuff removed. Given the nature of the images, and that the pictures aren't particularly good, I think we might as well delete, but people really should understand the concept of granting irrevocable license. - Jmabel ! talk 06:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Quality is pretty good IMO. Just compare with other pictures from the same cat: Category:Ampallang piercings. Trycatch (talk) 11:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. 99of9 (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Mr.kenji_miyazawa_like_chicken.jpg

License is wrong. This image is eligible for copyright. OTRS pending since March. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Derivative of copyright eligible work. No OTRS ticket found. Эlcobbola _talk 15:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Jigme_Thinley.jpg

Given other uploads by the uploader from the same time it appears, that he is just grabbing images of politicians from the web who recently hit the news and declare this images his own work. I refer to en:File:Simba Makoni.png (REUTERS), File:Mutambara.jpg (), other uploads like 'Jose Yulo', 'Benigno Aquino'. This photo is not the uploaders own work. Martin H. (talk) 18:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Delete lifted from The Bhutan Today (Restricted for Private Circulation Only) - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Delete --Schlurcher (talk) 05:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. 99of9 (talk) 13:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

File:GuernicaGernikara.jpg

I believe the reason given for keeping this by the closing administrator was flawed. We cannot simply assume that the city had permission to violate copyright, nor that that permission extends to us, without some sort of evidence of that. Its mere existence is not evidence of permission. Powers (talk) 14:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep We don't have a reason to belive otherwise, either. We can proove that we took the image under FOP, so if anybody complains about this usage, he has to complain about the mural and it's not us to be blamed for that.

However, creating a mural from a painting could be considered a non-comercial use only (since nobody pays for seeing it), such that this basically circumvents the law in any case. To be considered in general: If I owned a painting of picasso (not the copyrights, the real painting), I could simply place it outside my house at the wall, take a picture and declare it FOP. I don't think there's an article that prevents this "abuse". --PaterMcFly (talk) 14:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Spanish FoP requires permanence. So your hypothetical painting should be on the wall always. Then it would be under FOP. For example, there are Dalí and Miró works on the streets of Madrid. They are (happily) under FoP. --Error (talk) 22:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep I refer to this discussion. Powers failed to substantiate where we should have significant doubts per COM:PRP in this case. Do you know of any case where a Spanish city council commissioned a copyright violation? And, if this would be the case, why didn't the copyright holders object? This replica was erected in 1997. They would have had plenty of time by now. In addition, I want to point out that the permission given to the city does not need to extend directly to us. This is covered by {{FoP-Spain}}. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep It's out there for Spanish FOP, and I think we've got to presume legally.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

And I think it's a little abusive to reopen a DR you started a month later when you got no support on the first DR.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Please don't. I disagreed with the closure, asked AFBorchert to reverse. COM:DR#Appeal clearly says "If the admin declines to reverse the decision, you can request a review by other admins on Commons:Undeletion requests (or if the file was kept, renominate it for deletion)." I asked on Commons talk:Deletion requests for alternatives but received no reply, so I went ahead and followed the instructions. Powers (talk) 17:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

But more to the point -- how can we presume legality here? I honestly don't understand why, on a project that normally takes copyright so seriously, we're aiding and abetting what looks to be a clear copyright violation of one of the most important artworks of the 20th century. Powers (talk) 17:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

It's basically simple: Because we don't need to assume that the mural was errected illegally. AGF is also valid for people or rights outside wikipedia. Unless something is obviously and visibly illegal, nobody has to assume bad faith on others rights. Or do you generally assume that any new car you buy at your local dealer is stolen? No, you assume everything is in order with it unless you have evidence for the contrary. --PaterMcFly (talk) 18:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I have no doubt that the people who erected this copy were acting in good faith. But that doesn't mean they actually were in the clear in a strict copyright sense. It just doesn't seem at all likely to me that the copyright owners of the original painting would agree to such a public display in a country with freedom of panorama like Spain; if they're going to do that, why not just donate the original to the public domain and be done with it? I worry that this image is being used to circumvent the copyright on the original painting. Doesn't the precautionary principle suggest that we should err on the side of caution here? Powers (talk) 18:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

We aren't using to circumvent the copyright on the original painting; en.WP displays the original painting, and everywhere we're using this picture, which is hardly a good copy of the original, we could legally display the original under fair use. (That's not an argument about fair use, but anything we're circumventing is our own rules, not copyright.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

We're not aiding and abetting anything. This is apparently entirely legal under Spanish copyright law, if the template is correct: "Works permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes." It says nothing about legal works. Furthermore, Commons always takes reasonable presumptions about taking people's word that it's their picture unless there's evidence otherwise. I think assuming a city would not build a permanent mural without the right to display such falls under such.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Jcb (talk) 00:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Tu91_01.jpg

Don't think that combatavia.info have any copyrights on this iamge. Airplain was developed in Soviet Union in 1950s. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. I have strong doubts some of HK-47 (talk · contribs)'s other uploads. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Activslate.JPG

User's other contributions are copyvios from everhythingstockphoto. I do not believe this is "own work". -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Francescadani_gothic_lolita_butterfly.jpg

"permission to use" is not a sufficient license for Commons. See Commons:Licensing. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

It says "Since convinced Francesca to cc-by" // Liftarn (talk)

Not sure what the uploader meant by that, but that is not what is written in the quotation. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

We could ask Zanimum to file an OTRS for it. Wait, I looks like one is already sent. Then it should be OK. // Liftarn (talk) 19:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, from the wording of this diff comment, I fear that the user who added that "OTRS pending" template in 2009 wasn't quite sure what he was doing. Which would explain why a confirmation never followed. And I guess that the long delay is exactly the reason for the deletion request. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

It seems Zanimum is quite active at En Wikipedia so I'll give a notice there. // Liftarn (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

• Delete. "You can use" is not enough. And no direct confirmation by the copyright owner. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Mbdortmund: No OTRS permission

File:Brazil_-_World_Orchestra.jpg

Yanlış resim yüklemişim. Yeniden başka resim yükleyeceğim. Gemalmaz 18px ^ileti 21:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Mbdortmund: No OTRS permission

File:Atilla_Engin_-_The_Istanbul_Orchestra_Concert_NYC.jpg

İki kez yüklemişim Gemalmaz 18px ^ileti 20:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted by Herbythyme: No OTRS permission

File:Anuspiercing_sketch.jpg

probably rather uploaded to impress/shock users than for encyclopedic purposes Ben4Wiki (talk) 13:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Keep There are many better ways to shock, as it is not notably explicit. This drawing is quite low quality, but it has educational potential, at worst to inspire an artist to draw a better sketch. --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Jafeluv (talk) 02:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

File:House construction options.jpg

This is another of KVDP's vastly oversimplified flights of fancy. Even within the United States, not all of the three options shown would be possible in every locality (rules for building vary by state and city). Taken globally, there is even more variability. Also, there are many other options possible, again varying from state to state and country to country. In some places, owners can simply build, without any review, architect involvement, or certification. This also ignores the possibility of an owner using a "canned" set of drawings with a contractor, or, perhaps the most common combination in the USA, of the contractor building on spec from a set of drawings from an in-house architect. It over-emphasizes the role of pre-fab construction, at least in the USA. And, it exhibits a bias against pre-fab construction which may, indeed, be lower quality as it says, but which may often be higher quality, which it does not say. --     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok, the text in the image description wasn't completely clear on that these aren't all possible options for constructing a house. I modified the text accordingly. It was never the intent to make it appear like this, or state anything in such regard however. The main thing to show was simply that the use of an architect isn't always required. Again for the pre-fab construction, the intent isn't to put down a projection of the building options in (the USA) incorporating how much they are practiced. Instead, it is simply intented as a general schematic on what options are available, without wanting to be complete. Finally, the other issue was the OTRS; this wasn't filed aldough I did sent a message to Douglas Cutler Architects (permission was granted in a return mail). Forwarded it now to permissions-commons. KVDP (talk) 07:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

You still don't get it. Any generalization you make about the rules for house construction will be wrong. Even if you limit the scope to the USA, you cannot say, "the use of an architect isn't always required." There are jurisdictions where an architect is always required. And, this is a piece written by an architect, with his own agenda -- its assertion that prefab construction may be lower quality is a half truth -- many people here believe that factory construction is higher quality. We should not be advancing such an agenda.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

• I see the image as out of scope, not useful in any Wikipedia article. Delete. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:34, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

• As the image in referral is currently being considered for deletion, we'll await the final decision on the matter before going ahead with a license. In the meantime, I've marked the image as being processed for licensing. Please note that this is an OTRS procedure without prejudice as to the usability of the image. Asav (talk) 09:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC) (OTRS Team)

Kept, even in its simplified state, this has very real educational potential, thus within project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 20:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Angry_Beavers_Spooty_Spin.jpg

EXIF data on flickr shows this image is Copyrighted. — Tanvir 14:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• As far as I could understand, www.jzx100.com = boostsamurai = M.Rutkiewicz. (see this or his twitter for example). Trycatch (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept, per Trycatch. Kameraad Pjotr 19:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Triceratops-Eotriceratops_size_02.JPG

The Eotriceratops are too large. Also, another user has recently made a new, more accurate size comparison diagram of Eotriceratops-Triceratops. 83.185.31.193 17:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Kept, file is in use and thus within project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 22:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Wagenfeld_wg24_2256185.jpg

copyright issues Nomo (talk) 09:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 Question What copyright issue? The photo is own work. The lamp is not subject to copyright.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

the lamp is copyright protected. publishing of photographs of (protected) design works (without permission by the copyright holder, especially for commercial use (creative commons used on wikipedia/-media allows commercial usage)) is a copyright infringement (at least in germany).--Nomo (talk) 08:45, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

 Keep It's not that simple, see Commons:Applied art#Isn't every product copyrighted by someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case? I agree that this lamp may be 80% of the way to having elements that might make it eligible for copyright, but it is fundamentally a lamp, with no "pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independ­ently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article."      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 10:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course, it's not copyrightable in the US, but this a German lamp... Trycatch (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

 Keep per Commons:Applied art#Isn't every product copyrighted by someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case?. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Kept, this design is purely utilitarian. Kameraad Pjotr 19:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Dfrg.msc

Hi, I've looked through my archives and found a bunch of my own superseded, orphaned images - if you could delete them that'd be great

• File:Nintendo Array.jpg
• File:DFR Stencil.jpg
• File:Parlament House zoom.jpg
• File:FA Star.jpg
• File:Pornwall-Litter.jpg
• File:KittyHawkStitched.jpg
• File:Mona Stencil.jpg
• File:StatueGreyscale.jpg
• File:StatueNSW.jpg
• File:CuttingStencil.jpg
• File:DefragsDinner.jpg
• File:FakeFlower6.jpg
• File:BakedBread2.jpg
• File:GreenApplesJar.jpg
• File:RG Grapes.jpg

Cheers! Dfrg.msc (talk) 12:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC) ←uncompleted request. Trycatch (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Keep Hmm, good pictures, some are in use on talk pages... Why do you want to delete these pictures? It's not a problem that some your images are orphaned. Trycatch (talk) 22:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Kept most and deleted some. Amada44  ^{talk to me} 20:42, 13 October 2010 (UTC)