Commons:Deletion requests/2025/06/20

June 20

Files in Category:Stained-glass windows of Église Saint-Nicolas de Vihiers

No COM:FOP France, no indication about artist names and biographical data in the file description. Hence, per COM:PRP, a copyvio is at least momentarily to be assumed. Case could be solved with documenting the artist data (works may be PD-Old, but that must be demonstrated).

Grand-Duc (talk) 04:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Bonjour.
Avant que de nominer 25 fichiers à la suppression au motif qu'aucun nom d'artiste ne serait mentionné, que les œuvres ne seraient pas libres de droits d'auteur, qu'il s'agirait de copyvio, il pourrait être utile que vous vous donniez la peine d'examiner les fichiers incriminés avec un peu plus de soin. Vous auriez pu alors vous rendre compte qu'une partie du corpus des vitraux de l'église Saint-Nicolas de Vihiers est signée, datée, et que j'ai pris au surplus le temps d'apposer le template Palissy pour les verrières des bas-côtés qui sont répertoriées dans cette base patrimoniale. La classification de certains fichiers au nom de Jean Clamens aurait également dû vous alerter tout comme la présence systématique de métadonnées pour chaque fichier. Je retravaille avec Picasa presque toujours les fichiers de vitraux que je verse sur Commons. Si vous souhaitez que je verse ce soir les fichiers originaux des photos prises ce mercredi à Vihiers, cela ne devrait pas être un problème. Par ailleurs, vous pourrez aisément constater qu'un certain nombre de fichiers correspondant aux clefs de voûtes de l'église de Vihiers ont aussi fait l'objet d'un versement ce matin sans avoir été préalablement retraités. Chose extraordinaire, leurs métadonnées coïncident avec celles de certains fichiers de vitraux proposés à la suppression. Avec près de 181 000 contributions, seulement sur Commons, j'apprécie assez peu d'être soupçonné de m'approprier le travail d'autres personnes. J'attends un minimum de respect pour le travail désintéressé que j'accomplis sur la Wikipédia depuis 2010, mais visiblement, pour certains vérificateurs de licence, Commons est le lieu de la présomption de culpabilité, à charge pour le contributeur incriminé d'apporter la preuve de sa bonne foi face à des accusations infondées et gratuites. Ce genre d'agissement n'est pas vraiment de nature à m'encourager à continuer de contribuer sur Commons. Ce message est porté à la connaissance des administrateurs VIGNERON, Pymouss, Trizek. Cordialement. GO69 (talk) 12:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
 Comment I marked as "kept" the file 1 to 13 who are clearly in the public domain for 36 years. For the others, it's unclear but they seem old enough, applying PRP seems to be a stretch there. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

No. 14 is a cropped version of No. 11 by Jean Clamens (d. 1918) —Tcr25 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Sentinel of Freedom Statue, Luneta.jpg

Unfortunately, as of this writing, there is still no Freedom of Panorama clause under RA8293 (Philippine copyright law), and the copyright amendment bills of the 19th Congress containing FoP clause (House Bills 799, 2672, and 3838 as well as Senate Bill 2326) remained pending (therefore, "died") at the end of the 19th Congress.

This means Wikimedia Commons cannot host freely/commercially-licensed images of recent PH monuments like these. This and other deleted images of this and other recent monuments can be undeleted if the PH copyright law is formally reformed. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Note: I created a derivative image that crops out most of the statue, File:Sentinel of Freedom plinth with National Museum historical marker.jpg, to be used to illustrate d:Q134509258. I hope that this derived image meets COM:DEMINIMIS with regard to the statue, and I also attest that the plinth itself is not copyrightable. —seav (talk) 10:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
@Seav the derivative is OK, and in fact it doesn't need de minimis claim since the statue is unusable in the derivative, so not infringing sculptural copyright. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 12:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Akaraathiyiyal.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sebastian Wallroth as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: non-free book covers released after 1905 are not allowed; see Commons:Licensing
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion. IMO, there is hardly anything copyrightable on the depicted book-cover. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:UEFA Conference League full logo (2024 version).svg

raster image disguised as svg file Herr chagall (talk) 09:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Herr chagall As the file is widely used on wikipedia project, we would first need an exact replacement as PNG or (true) SVG file. Best, ChemSim (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Victor de Laveleye (around 1944) (cropped).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Polarlys as no source (No source since) Siebenschläferchen (talk) 10:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep The source is listed. --RAN (talk) 01:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
This is no source, but a random place on the internet hosting this file without further information why this would qualify for the terms of this license. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 10:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Victor de Laveleye (around 1944).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Polarlys as no source (No source since) Siebenschläferchen (talk) 10:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep The source is listed. --RAN (talk) 16:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
This is no source, but a random place on the internet hosting this file without further information why this would qualify for the terms of this license. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 10:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Am Deich 1, 18347 Dierhagen 02.jpg

Violation of the privacy rights of Egon Krenz. Nuuk (talk) 12:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

COM:NCR. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 00:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Am Deich 1, 18347 Dierhagen 01.jpg is the same. --Nuuk (talk) 06:06, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Las Vegas Mormon flag 1855.png

It is a fake and non-historical flag derived from an unsourced blog. Aquabluetesla (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Why does the flag need to be completely removed from Wikimedia Commons? If you think the source is bad, just remove it from whatever Wikipedia article displays it. HoosierMan1816 (talk) 02:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
"Fake" and "unsourced" are not the same thing. If you can disprove that a flag like this ever existed, then fine. Otherwise, it probably just needs a better description to document what is known and what is speculation, and allow other projects to decide whether to use it or not.
I do see another source of the old material at https://www.nicholasbjacobsen.com/las-vegas-mormon-fort.html . So there was *some* flag used historically, with the description being open to interpretation. It sounds like a historical society had one interpretation, and this one was the guess of the blog's author of the same source material, so is indeed somewhat original to them. It should be documented that it is a speculative design from that particular blog's author. If this .png is a straight copy if the bitmap from that website, it may be a copyright violation -- if redrawing the same idea, then it may be OK. The blog's author has another graphic of the historical society's guess -- so they are both trying to represent the same flag, just with different opinions on how to interpret the original description. It does seem like it was a valid historical flag, but with a large range of ways to interpret the text and colors. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:59, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Notes on Burials Cover (Photo by Imogen Wade).jpg

license bogus? Albinfo (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:My profile pic..jpg

Facebook 186.175.103.106 23:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Kept: This user was an active contributor and one profile photo is ok. --ChemSim (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

File:My profile pic..jpg

For the previous deletion request, it was not based on scope but on copyright violation. 186.172.50.222 20:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

  •  Comment If you think it's a copyright violation, please provide more detailed information on where this image was sourced. I could not find it anywhere on the internet using Google Lens search. Best, ChemSim (talk) 20:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN SIXTH CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN FIFTH CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN FOURTH CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN EIGHTH CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN THRID CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN SEVENTH CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN SECOND CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 22:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:SPANISH AMERICAN FIRST CORPS BADGE.png

Uploaded a better version ROBERT J COURTEMANCHE (talk) 22:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Angyal István portré.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Hungarikusz Firkász as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: A magyar jogszabályok szerint az első közzététel dátumától számítva 70+1 év után válik az ismeretlen szerzőjű kép közkinccsé. Amennyiben az 1955-ös év a publikálás éve, akkor ez jövőre lesz esedékes. Azonban be kéne mutatni azt, hogy hol jelent meg ez a kép nyilvánosan 1955-ben, vagy korábban. Jelenleg biztos, hogy nem közkincs.  Delete King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Losonczy Géza portréja.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Hungarikusz Firkász as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Nem ismert, hogy hol hozták ezt a képet nyilvánosságra 1954-ben, a magyar szerzői jogi törvények szerint viszont ez és nem a készítés dátuma alapján válik az ismeretlen mű közkinccsé 70+1 év után. Amíg nem ismert az, hogy 70+1 éve publikálták, addig nem tekinthető közkincsnek és  Delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Szia, frissítettem az összefoglalót. A Várkonyi Studio hozta ezt a képet nyilvánosságra 1947-ben. Üdv, Atoljaka (talk) 20:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
 Keep per @Atoljaka publication year 1947.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Atoljaka, Jeff G., mutassátok már meg nekem, hogy hol lett ez a kép 1947-ben nyilvánosságra hozva? A weboldalon csak annyi látható, hogy Kor/Készítés ideje: 1947 (körül), ami viszont nem a nyilvánosságra hozatal ideje. Még a készítés helye is ismeretlennek van megjelölve (Keletkezés/készítés helye: ismeretlen), a nyilvánosságrahozatalról pedig semmilyen információ nem szerepel. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 08:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)