Commons:Deletion requests/2025/03/16

March 16

Files uploaded by Zmu'az4Z (talk · contribs)

Possible copyvios: small size, no metadata and user's copyvio history.

0x0a (talk) 03:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Atorcarlospacheco.jpg

Copyright and aunthorship seems suspect - seems to be this image from 5 years ago 4300streetcar (talk) 04:46, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

On the other hand, this may be an image of the editor that the editor possess the copyright to, so maybe not. 4300streetcar (talk) 04:51, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:TheSphere2024.png

Likely copyrighted displayed work projection on The Sphere surface. Also, complex and detailed work which is above the threashold of originality per COM:TOO Ooligan (talk) 05:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Per w:Sphere (venue), this is a "music and entertainment arena." That makes it a building, not a sculpture, and therefore, it should be covered by COM:FOP US. You're saying the lighting on the facade is copyrighted? What are the precedents in the U.S. for that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Have I said that it was a sculpture? COM:FOP US states that If this were to be deleted, than those two works above that I mentioned should also be deleted, since you believe that this is a copyright violation. 🗽Freedoxm🗽 (talk) 05:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
I guess I have to thread comments differently for it to be evident that I am addressing the deletion requester, rather than you, but reread what I said, in particular the second sentence, and see if you still think I was addressing you with my questions. But you're saying I believe it's a copyright violation, or that Ooligan is saying that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
I believe that @Ooligan is. I probably should have split that reply. If you got confused, I'm sorry. 🗽Freedoxm🗽 (talk) 07:00, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
It's OK. We were both confused, and I should try to remember to thread better. I tend to just reply to the last remark a lot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 16 March 2025 (UTC)


File:Ilham Aliyev inaugurated the Citizens' Reception Center of the Administration of the President 15.jpg

No freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan A1Cafel (talk) 07:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. The only object here which could be infringed upon (the portrait) was produced by the office of the president. The office of the president (who freely licensed this photograph) thus has the right to release a derivative of said portrait under a free license. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ilham Aliyev inaugurated the Citizens' Reception Center of the Administration of the President 03.jpg

No freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan A1Cafel (talk) 07:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. The only object here which could be infringed upon (the portrait) was produced by the office of the president. The office of the president (who freely licensed this photograph) thus has the right to release a derivative of said portrait under a free license. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:09, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:ADIO HQ.jpg

No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 08:05, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Delete: per above All the Best -- Chuck Talk 06:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)


There are photos of multiple buildings from the UAE uploaded to wikipedia. Shahroze (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
As fair use. And right now, you're posting on Commons, which has no fair use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:25, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
@Shahroze English Wikipedia has no obligation to comply with the copyright laws outside the US (as per w:en:Template talk:FoP-USonly#RFC: Does US FoP apply to foreign works?, only US law is respected there, and so US architectural FoP is applied to all buildings of 110 countries still under their architects' copyrights). But on Wikimedia Commons (which is not English Wikipedia), we have to respect architectural copyrights in the UAE, so we cannot accept 99% of all buildings from that no-FoP country (except images that don't show a building or two or three as the main subjects, like general cityscape images). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 13:47, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Plakat za prosvjed Prvić Luke, 2024.jpg

COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 08:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

As a part of news reporting on demonstrations in Croatia (it is call-to-demonstation poster), I believe it is covered by COM:NOP Croatia, specifically "news of the day and other news, having the character of mere items of press information". I've updated copyright template, could you please check if it is OK now? Mnalis (talk) 12:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Additionally, I'd note that the poster in question was not temporary as per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Permanent vs temporary, so Croatian FOP (which allows 2D artworks) would apply. i.e. "If it was put there with the intention of leaving it in the public place indefinitely or at least for the whole natural lifetime of the work, then it is "permanent". [...] Even quickly decaying works can thus be "permanent" and therefore be subject to freedom of panorama. Street paintings, ice, sand, or snow sculptures rarely last more than a few days or weeks. If they're left in public space for their natural lifetime, they are considered "permanent" all the same. But if, for instance, an ice sculpture is exhibited only for a few hours and then moved to cold storage, it may not be permanently placed" (emphasis mine)
While the poster in question was unlikely to last more than several months (being made of paper and open to rain and winds), the intention was never to recover it, but for it to remain there for its natural lifetime, so IMHO FOP would apply (even if the image was not already COM:NOP Croatia). Mnalis (talk) 13:02, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
I don't know anything about Croatian law, but COM:FOP Croatia seems like a better argument to me than a claim that a flyer with a stylized map has "the character of mere items of press information," like a purely textual press release. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:St Michaels Elmwood Road Architect.png

Uploader falsely claimed this as "own work", but the actual author died in 1938. According to UK copyright law (life + 70 years), this work entered the public domain in 2009. If it is not properly marked as public domain, it should be deleted. Karakalem (talk) 08:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 Comment, are you referring to William Douglas Caröe, who passed away in 1938, as the author of the photograph? He is the person depicted in the photo, not the photographer. Tvpuppy (talk) 10:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
You're right; I confused the copyright topics. However, when I researched the origin of the photograph, I found that it was taken by the Lafayette Studio, which was active between 1880 and 1962.
I don't know whether the photograph was ever published in any press or media outlet. If it was never published, should we base the 70-year rule for public domain status on the year 1962?
https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw180959/William-Douglas-WD-Care?LinkID=mp104053&search=sas&sText=Car%C3%B6e&OConly=true&role=sit&rNo=0 Karakalem (talk) 10:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
I think it is clear now. The photo can stay. I will upload a better version and update the license and category.
Lafayette is already defined and has hundreds of photos already.
Creator:Lafayette
Category:Male portrait photographs by Lafayette Studio Karakalem (talk) 11:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Ok I see it now. Thank you for providing the source and the links. Tvpuppy (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Thank you as well! I didn't have permission to overwrite the previous version of the photo, so I uploaded a higher-quality version separately and updated the information accordingly. File:William Douglas ('W.D.') Caröe, 1930.jpg Karakalem (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Graphic art "Renewal" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720143.tif

Copyvio, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Graphic art "Renewal" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720143.jpg ReneeWrites (talk) 08:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Dabiq logo.svg

Incorrect logo. The correct logo is on the cover of the magazine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dabiq-English-number-one.jpg 2A00:20:C294:C36:7E77:E138:2AA5:6317 11:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Charlotte Delbo (site officiel).jpg

The title of the file suggests this was copied from an official website. There is exif data but this was clearly not originally taken with an iPhone as its subject died in 1985. Yann Pensec-Roussel's only contribution to Wikimedia Commons is uploading this file. NatGeo thinks it's public domain, but without an author or date of creation/publication we just don't know Vera (talk) 12:57, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I found it on the archived official website. It says "All photos are copyright Eric Schwab, with the kind permission of Mrs. Corinne Schwab". That would be Éric Schwab (Q26934893), who passed away in 1977. This file isn't public domain until 2058.
Vera (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Howard Lutnick 2025.jpg

Copyright violation. Reverse search of this image shows that there is no evidence that this photo has been taken by Daniel Torok, including in the source link. Considering this image is not published in USGov websites, its copyright is uncertain on whether it is public domain as per USGov work or copyrighted as private individual's work Bookish Worm (talk) 13:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Commerce Department now hosts a version of this portrait. Abzeronow (talk) 19:47, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
The image has now been published on Commerce.gov as the official portrait, so the licensing has been updated according. Not sure about Daniel Torok being the source. Hope the original uploader can offer some insight on this. Samhiuy (talk) 19:47, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ixodes muris.JPG

I am the uploader of this file. I have now realized that this is a picture of a different species, I don't know which one. Magne Flåten (talk) 13:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Could someone identify this? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Saggingstyle.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 77.171.30.195 14:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Similar or same OOS picture(s) of a certain youngster have been uploaded by different (?) users as own work! Delete them all as F10 and F1. 186.172.199.218 13:41, 17 March 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:Jongen nuttigt een sigaret.jpg

Dit is een foto van mij waarvoor ik geen toestemming heb gegeven om te uploaden 2A02:A213:2B40:4380:C4DC:EE8D:77D6:6E1D 22:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Kept: no valid reason for deletion; the person in the photo is unidentifiable, and even if he is, the photo appears to have been taken in a public location, so there can be no expectation of privacy. —holly {chat} 20:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Jongen nuttigt een sigaret.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 2A02:A420:590:8DB5:494B:75B:823C:BE2F 14:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Neither an own work, judging by the framework. Also F10. Delete speedily. 186.172.90.110 16:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
 Speedy keep per previous DR, same reason provided as before. Tvpuppy (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Jongen maakt een typisch klassieke dakgoot schoon.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 2A02:A420:590:8DB5:494B:75B:823C:BE2F 14:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Speedy. F10 and duplicate 186.172.90.110 17:05, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Dakgoot.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 2A02:A420:590:8DB5:494B:75B:823C:BE2F 14:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Speedy. F10 and duplicate 186.172.90.110 17:04, 16 March 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:Jongen bezig met het nuttigen van een sigaret.jpg

Dit is een foto waar ik op sta en daar gaf ik geen toestemming voor 2A02:A213:2B40:4380:C4DC:EE8D:77D6:6E1D 22:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Kept: no valid reason for deletion; the person in the photo is unidentifiable, and even if he is, the photo appears to have been taken in a public location, so there can be no expectation of privacy. —holly {chat} 20:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Jongen bezig met het nuttigen van een sigaret.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 2A02:A420:590:8DB5:494B:75B:823C:BE2F 14:36, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 Speedy keep per previous DR, same reason provide as before. Tvpuppy (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
F10, duplicate, false own work... holly, why did you keep it? 186.172.45.209 00:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Vartos Turgaus Aikštė.png

Copyright violation: Google Maps Street View screenshot Fnyxo (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Sagging style.jpg

this is a picture of me, I don't want this online 2A02:A420:590:8DB5:494B:75B:823C:BE2F 14:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Delete - The man in the picture did not give consent to the photographer to picture them with sagging jeans. 🗽Freedoxm🗽 (talk) 21:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:BRM4117-Technate-of-America-1940 lowres2-3000x2088.jpg

Appears to be copyright violation. Uploader claims this as own work, but the map carries a copyright notice from 1940. Skopien (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Comment. Probably worth checking to see if this was renewed. It's in use across several projects. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

File:S11 Bielice.png

Copyright violation: Google Maps Street View screenshot Fnyxo (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Obwodnica Ostrów Wielkopolski.png

Copyright violation: Google Maps Street View screenshot Fnyxo (talk) 14:38, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Тетяна Дмитрівна (talk · contribs)

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram and text image.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:01, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Azar en el Club de Grabado de Montevideo.jpg

No indication of own work but could be PD. 186.172.90.110 15:11, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ric Flair Big Gold NWA 1988 colored.png

The image does have a copyright notice, as does the entire magazine from which it is taken. It appears on page 4 of the magazine, as part of the magazines indicia. Not a free image. oknazevad (talk) 15:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

@Oknazevad "Wrestling's MAIN EVENT magazine" copyright status have already been discussed in a previous deletion request, which concluded to keep these images.
The magazine in question does not have a proper copyright notice, per the rules established by the Copyright Act of 1976, which require the inclusion of thee following elements (see Chapter 2200 of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices (3rd Edition), regarding copyright notice):
  • The symbol © or the word “Copyright” or the abbreviation “Copr.”;
  • The year of first publication for the work;
  • The name of the copyright owner, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner.
The notice of copyright at page 4 does not include the year and therefore is not valid, making the work public domain.
-- Pfcab (talk) 16:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
The cover date of the magazine is a clear marker of date of publication. I dispute the argument that just because it is not repeated on the same page including a clear copyright notice the work is in the public domain. I'd like to see something from case law that supports that interpretation. oknazevad (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Looking further through the aforementioned circular, I quote section 2205.1(E) D:

Likewise, a year of publication that is prominently displayed elsewhere on copies or phonorecords may be acceptable if it is an appropriate date and if it can reasonably be considered part of the notice. For instance, the U.S. Copyright Office may accept a date that appears in the “Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data” or in the year of issue for a periodical, even if the date does not appear on the same page as the rest of the notice. (emphasis added)

I think the above discussion was wrongly decided, as the Copyright Office clearly indicates that a date of publication appearing elsewhere in a periodical is still considered a valid date for copyright notice purposes. oknazevad (talk) 21:56, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Isabelgehweiler.jpg

screenshot (no own work) Dirk Lenke (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Newspaper-002.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Tvpuppy as no permission (No permission since). Since Izvestia (per the English Wikipedia article) was the official organ of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, I believe {{PD-RU-exempt}} applies. Bedivere (talk) 15:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I replaced the license with PD-RU-exempt. Alexander Novikov (talk) 16:23, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
  •  Delete. Bedivere, this is definitely not PD-RU-exempt, which is for laws, other legal texts, judicial decisions, other materials of legislative, administrative and judicial character. Newspapers and magazines are not included, just do a quick search on previous similar RfDs since you've never come across them before. --Quick1984 (talk) 06:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
    Yeah, that was just my assumption but precisely because I was doubtful I turned this into a DR Bedivere (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Salomon Azar Segura dicatando un taller de arte a niños.jpg

Maybe PD but doubtful own work. If you keep it correct the word "dicatando" in the title to "dictando" please. 186.172.90.110 15:48, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep Now fixed. --RAN (talk) 02:45, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Newspaper-001.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Tvpuppy as no permission (No permission since). Since this was an official organ of the Soviet Union, I believe {{PD-RU-exempt}} applies. Bedivere (talk) 15:48, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I replaced the license with PD-RU-exempt. Alexander Novikov (talk) 16:21, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
  •  Delete. TV program guide is NOT an official organ of the Soviet Union, definitely not PD-RU-exempt, which is for laws, other legal texts, judicial decisions, other materials of legislative, administrative and judicial character. A very unexpected and strange assumption that misleads the inexperienced uploader. --Quick1984 (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
    As I said on the other DR, had I been so sure about the copyright status I'd have just declined the speedy deletion in the first place. Bedivere (talk) 07:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Avos47 (talk · contribs)

Possible copyright violation. Person in the photo died in 1940.

Maxinvestigator (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Да, совершенно верно- человек на фото Нарышкина Е.А. она умерла в 1940г. Это статья о ней. Фото из моего семейного архива. В чём проблема? Avos47 (talk) 07:49, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Наличие фотографии в вашем семейном архиве не делает вас правообладателем. Кто является автором фото? Maxinvestigator (talk) 13:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Kevin Greene Pro Football Hall of Famer.jpg

Highly unlikely this is own work. Description says picture is from 1994 but the uploader put the date as 2015. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:59, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I took the photo at a game in 1994. I scanned the 8x10 I printed of the photo in 2015. Remember, there was no digital photography in 1994, so the digital date of any older photograph reflects the date the image was scanned into a computer so it could be digital files. I still have the sideline photographer's pass from the game. 104.148.252.14 17:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
 Comment presuming you are the uploader (please log in to comment on your own work in the future), please correct your uploads to give correct date of when you created photo. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:55, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
 Keep the story checks out to me. Not found by reverse image search  REAL 💬 ⬆   17:44, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Otiorhynchus scaber-f.jpg

Unnecessary and potentially harmful, no pages link here now. Magne Flåten (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Solingen, Gustav-Coppel-Park, Wandgemälde am oberen westl. Parkrand, Bild 2.jpg

copyrighted character and also street art that is copyrighted. SDudley (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Please state the legal basis for your view. Im Fokus (talk) 19:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Daffy Duck, and this particular version, is still copyrighted in the US where the file is hosted. Also this is street art by someone, and thus is a work of art by them. We do not have permission for either. SDudley (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
  •  Comment That is the question. It is so easy to make free a copyrighted character in order that an unknown paint it on a public wall? Surely when the street artist had a licence from Warner Bros. That's improbable and than follows COM:PCP. It may be out of copyright in 2033. --Ras67 (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
    Personally I think this design of Daffy is not based on the version that will be free of copyright in 2033. We will need to wait until his later redesign that this is drawing on. This is the version of Daffy that will be PD in 2033. SDudley (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Otiorhynchus scaber-o.jpg

Potentially harmful in the future and unnecessary now because no pages link here now. Magne Flåten (talk) 17:26, 16 March 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:PaulKeating.jpg

While this photo of the painting is licensed as CC-BY-2.0 on Flickr, the artist of the painting and location is unknown, {{FoP-Australia}} considers 2D art works as copyrightable. The lack of anything about the orgins of the painting leads me to think that this is a copyrighted painting. Bidgee (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted, the painting is copyrighted and freedom of panorama does not apply. Kameraad Pjotr 21:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

File:PaulKeating.jpg

https://www.civicsandcitizenship.edu.au/cce/default.asp?id=14942 is a broken or invalid link, therefore cannot verify if this photo is from that site. Delete per Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle Bidgee (talk) 17:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Wikipedia dans Chrome OS.png

This file was initially tagged by Ahunt as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This is not the user's own work but is a screenshot of proprietary software, showing the Google Chrome OS interface components, licensed under Google's Terms of Service and cannot be released under a free licence. It states, "You may not copy, modify, distribute, sell, or lease any part of our services or software."|source= https://web.archive.org/web/20120525033052/http://www.google.com/intl/en/chromebook/termsofservice.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/chromebook/termsofservice.html https://policies.google.com/terms and https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/terms/. Likely De minimis, second opinion? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree. Besides, no part of Chrome's services or software is being distributed through this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Delete: As per my original speedy nom this screenshot clearly shows the entire Chrome interface, so is an obvious copyright violation under the software's licence. Furthermore the uploader is claiming the entire screenshot as his own work, which it is not. The Wikipedia screenshot portion is correctly licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 license and the GNU Free Documentation License as the template indicated, but the Chrome interface part cannot be released under any licence that is compatible with Commons licensing requirements. Being proprietary software, Google Chrome has to be declared under Google's proprietary terms of service, a licence incompatible with Common's uploading requirements. It plainly says "You may not copy, modify, distribute, sell, or lease any part of our services or software" and in this case it has been copied and distributed. A de minimis argument might be made if it showed only a small part (minimus) of the interface, but this shows the entire interface, so cannot be de minimis. This image could be kept if it was cropped to exclude the Chrome interface and the file name changed to reflect that. - Ahunt (talk) 12:23, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Taras Shevchenko Museum in Kaniv-2011.jpg

73 years have passed since Vasyl Krychevsky has died in 1952. Commons:FOP Ukraine Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 17:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. And Ukraine has a 70 year PMA copyright term. I'm not seeing the problem. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:28, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
    User:IronGargoyle: The problem is that the museum had two authors. The second one Petro Kostyrko has died 43 years ago. Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 23:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Eglise Vert Saint Denis 2025.jpg

Low quality Nicolas22g (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. Seems like perfectly fine quality to me. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Eglise Vsd 2025.jpg

Low quality Nicolas22g (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. Seems like perfectly fine quality to me. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Eglise vsd2025.jpg

Low quality Nicolas22g (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. Seems like perfectly fine quality to me. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Quarentena - Aula online -.jpg

At first, maybe this is copyright violation, VRT-permission from artist Júlia Callegari is needed. At second, unused art of non-notable artist is generally considered out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 18:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Julius Dautartas (1953).jpg

Duplicate of Fnyxo (talk) 19:12, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:St Catherine's Chapel, Lydiate Uplighting Collage.jpg

Advertisement Orange sticker (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Files in Category:Statue of Al-Khwarizmi (Khiva)

No FOP in Uzbekistan per COM:FOP Uzbekistan. According to this website, the statue was inaugurated in 1983.

Howardcorn33 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Last file in that list—File:المختصر في حساب الجبر والمقابلة.pdf—is Al-Jabr published in London in 1830. On Internet Archive and other online catalogs. I added this information to the file description. It's incorrectly tagged as part of this deletion request. -- Shervinafshar (talk) 00:04, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
Since a week has passed and I haven't heard any objections to my clarification on incorrect inclusion of the PDF file mentioned above, I consider this a clear and non-controversial case and I'll be removing the request for deletion template from File:المختصر في حساب الجبر والمقابلة.pdf. Point any further comments or concerns to the talk page of that file. -- Shervinafshar (talk) 23:31, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Wappen-Visigothia-Vektor.png

Kein eigenes Werk, sondern Abbild eines Wappens einer Studentenverbindung. Leider keine weiteren Angaben, die auf Gemeinfreiheit schließen lassen könnten. Das Wappen könnte alt sein (1882?), muss es aber nicht. Die Verwendung von zwei unterschiedlichen Zirkeln könnte auf eine Fusion zweier Vorgängerverbindungen hindeuten, was in der Regel mit einer Änderung des Wappens einhergeht. GerritR (talk) 19:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Pancilas (talk · contribs)

posters that i uncertain uploader is copyright holder. also there is File:Steryo, Frankfurt, 2010.jpg, metadata says author is Marc Schultz. we dont know Pancilas is Marc Schultz. so... if the user dont give any info about copyright situations of these works i believe we should  Delete. need COM:VRT.

modern_primat ඞඞඞ ----TALK 20:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Magen Aboth Synagogue Alibaug.jpg

It's a duplicate of File:Magen Aboth Synagogue in Alibaug.jpg Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 20:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Oleg. Yes, you are right. It is a duplicate and can be deleted. I added a duplicate because it errored out while adding the first time, and I thought it did not get added. But apparently it did. Cheers.Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 05:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
User:Georgethedragonslayer: Thank you, and a much bigger thanks for taking that picture and sharing it! I also took the pics of it recently. Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Martin insaurralde y Marina Lesci.jpg

Dudoso trabajo propio, de baja calidad y resolución, parece haber sido tomado de algún sitio en internet y subido a Commons. Banfield - Amenazas aquí 20:47, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Simion e Meloni.jpg

Note: When I was about to pass this image, I got a message saying that the source flickr account is blacklisted. Leoboudv (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

@Leoboudv: I checked with COM:QFI and User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors, but I don't find the account 202354425@N02 being listed one of the bad accounts. That's strange.廣九直通車 (talk) 12:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
  •  I withdraw my nomination: I was now able to flickrpas this image without getting an error message 廣九直通車 Maybe this account is now OK. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Oba Adesoji Aderemi with ada at Olojo festival.png

The picture is fake and edited by yariba man.. He's deceiving people with fake pictures.. Please delete it.. Emwantaa (talk) 21:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

You can debate on the file's talk page whether the original was deliberately sepia-toned and shouldn't be whitened, but that is not a deletion reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Have to agree with Ikan Kekek. Absolutely nothing wrong with the image. The user who has nominated this file for deletion has no reason for doing so, other than the fact that the image is used on a wikipedia article page they are unhappy about. They have also nominated the other opening image on the article Ada and Abere page on Wikipedia for deletion for similar reasons. (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Oba_Ufeluyi_II_of_Usen.jpg)
Their ulterior motive is evidenced by the used of a slur ' Yariba man ' in the their opening remark. Oramfe (talk) 07:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
What does the slur mean? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
It is a northern nigerian pronunciation of the original name "Yoruba" typed out. It is often used by southern nigerians who ascribe their own negative meanings to it such as "deciever" etc, to refer to Yoruba people in a bigoted manner. Yorimages (talk) 11:57, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
That's really stupid. Thanks for explaining. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
This image is not fake. Nothing I have done to this image is against the Wikipedia guidelines to improve it's quality.
The things I did was to crop the image, adjust the levels, and remove the discoloured gradient.
It has no basis for deletion. Yorimages (talk) 11:54, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
The description has a footnote of Willet, Frank (1967) Ife in the history of West African sculpture, p. 141 - is that where the photograph has been taken from? If so, is the book not copyrighted? Who is the photographer? Belbury (talk) 16:18, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Frank willet himself (who passed away in 2006) is the original photographer, as well as the creator of the book. The book was donated to theinternetarchives after Marygrove College Library closed down in 2019. Yorimages (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Hunter with bolt-action rifle shooting stand Sweden 01.png

Unfortunately, the source video was deleted years ago on Youtube. Leoboudv (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə şəhəri Akademik Zərifə Əliyeva adına məktəb-lisey - 2.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:14, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə şəhəri Akademik Zərifə Əliyeva adına məktəb-lisey.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Musiqi məktəbi.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə şəhəri Akademik Zərifə Əliyeva adına məktəb-lisey - 1.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ticarət mərkəzi 1.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ticarət mərkəzi 2.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ticarət mərkəzi 3.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ticatət mərkəzi.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Uğur Avto Salon.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:94 saylı kənd seçki məntəqəsi.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bank Respublika (Bərdə).jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bina.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I feel like you have a certain passion towards files related to a certain country, but in this picture I only see a simple hut without any architectural intellect and worry that Commons visitors could find ridiculous this kind of deletion requests. Therefore I suggest you to better withdraw this and several more of your similar requests. Regards. 186.172.92.171 01:24, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
A delightful example of passive aggressive. Did you ever stop to ask yourself why the uploader would have uploaded the images when he knew - or ought to have known - that they were in violation of Commons policies? Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:02, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Unfortunately, several photos of even more boring buildings than this have been found by admins to violate Azerbaijani copyright laws that prohibit the commercial use of photos of copyrighted buildings - the license to use images hosted on Commons commercially is unfortunately required by the Wikimedia Foundation. It is interesting that Laurel Lodged seems at least lately to specialize in deletion requests of pictures taken in Azerbaijan, but that does not make the deletion requests invalid. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:51, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Your analysis of the policy is correct. Thank you. However, I see no need for you to delve further into possible motivations for the nominations: it is sufficient for you to continue to assume WP:GoodFaith. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
I didn't delve into that: the IP user made a statement about it, and as you see, I pushed back and merely stated that your choices of targets are interesting. I would affirm that you make good-faith deletion requests, regardless of the interesting fact about what part of the world most of the photos in question depict, and as you know, my main objection to some of them is that some of the buildings look plausibly public domain and you don't try to check that, and therefore are occasionally wrong. Based on closing admin decisions, it appears to me that you are right over 90% of the time, which is certainly a track record that should be respected, and moreover, I haven't seen you try to tag photos for speedy deletion based on FoP concerns, so your procedures are by the book, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Avtovağzalı.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:21, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Mədəniyət evi.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:21, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Pasportstolu.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Qaz idarəci binası.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Rayonu İcra Hakimiyəti qonaq evi.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Rəsm qalareyacı binası.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə tikililəri.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə İcra Hakimiyəti binası.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə İdman Kompleksi.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdə Şəhər 93 saylı seçki məntəqəsi.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdədə OVİR və DYP binaları.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Bərdədə Yeni bina.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Do you know who the architect for this building was? It's not in an obviously new style, though it could be retro. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Perhaps the uploader @Elmeddin82: could tell us. The onus lies on him to prove that his uploads adhere to Commons policies. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:09, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I don't agree with requesting deletion of pictures of plausibly public domain buildings without knowing anything about them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
When an uploader clicks the upload button, he warrants that the image complies with Commons policies. This places the burden of proof on the uploader. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Most of your deletion requests are good, but you've requested deletion of photos of 19th-century buildings a couple of times. You don't feel a deletion requester has any responsibility to research non-obvious cases, regardless of whether there's a specific policy requiring that? In that case, we disagree. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Rayon İcra Hakimiyətinin qonaq evi.JPG

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Yaşayış binası.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Azerbaijan Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

File:NikosAthanasopoulos.JPG

Possible copyright violation because no proper author is provided; I cannot find indications that this belongs to the public domain; the photo was probably taken in the 1980s, which is not old enough. Greece requires 70 years to be considered free. A.Cython (talk) 23:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

The photo is on Sansimera.gr but I don't know if they took it from here or viceversa. 186.172.45.209 00:58, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I know. I had this conversation with people here on the Wiki Commons, who are very strict about this. I can think of several pictures that could be used to improve WP articles. However, we need to follow regulations. A solution that I have been told is to be uploaded on the respective wiki (not here in the Wiki Commons) on the grounds of fair use. See for english WP and here for Greek . I have been told that the fair use argument does not apply to Wiki Commons. The other solution is to point to the creator/owner of the picture and explicitly provide the license for the photo to be used. A.Cython (talk) 03:15, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Ukmjenkins (talk · contribs)

Wildly different quality/image size between files and lack of author information, plus the fact that one image has a Sea Shepherd watermark, implies the licensing is false.

Dronebogus (talk) 23:22, 16 March 2025 (UTC)