Files uploaded by Edward Myer (talk · contribs)

Wherever these images came from it’s certainly not the copyright holder

• File:Gene Deal During Interview.jpg
• File:Bruse Wane Performing at Smash Studio.jpg
• File:Bruse Wane performing in New York.jpg
• File:Big U During 2020 Interview.jpg
• File:Charlie Rock LD During Podcast.jpg
• File:Bruse Wane In A 2022 Interview.jpg
• File:Bruse Wane Interview screen shot.jpg

Dronebogus (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

These files should not be up for deletion, or deleted. All images are in use under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License ((CC BY 3.0) Which is allowed under wikipedia and Wikipedia commons policy. All licenses associated with these images are properly listed and attributions has been given. ( More detailed break down below)

The Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (CC BY 3.0) grants others the right to use, share, and adapt your work as long as they credit you appropriately. It allows for commercial and non-commercial use, remixing, and building upon your work, but requires attribution and no additional restrictions on subsequent users.

Key aspects of CC BY 3.0:

• Permissible Uses: You can use, share, and adapt the work.
• Commercial Use: The license allows for commercial use of the work.
• Remixing and Building: Others can remix, tweak, and build upon the work.
• Attribution Required: You must attribute the original creator and their work, which includes the licensor's name, the title of the work, and the URL for online material.
• No Additional Restrictions: Subsequent users are not subject to any additional restrictions beyond those outlined in the license.

In essence, CC BY 3.0 is a relatively permissive license that encourages sharing and collaboration while still acknowledging the original creator. Edward Myer (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Dronebogus it looks like the videos are marked correctly as CC BY on YouTube as described on their video description. I'm not sure I understand your argument, are you suggesting that the uploader there is not the original copyright holder and a release there is invalid? Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

I'll note the argument on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disco King Mario.jpg the describes that the original uploader likely was not able to propperly release them, so if that's the case here it would likely be beneficial to further explain the nomination. Thanks, Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I just mean that the relevant footage probably isn’t the video creator’s to release. Dronebogus (talk) 00:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Gene Deal During Interview.jpg is on YouTube from a channel in South Africa. What evidence do we have that this channel holds the rights to an interview like this in the US? It's a highly topical interview, the sort where the footage has real commercial value attached to it. I find it to not meet the level of credibility we need to take it on trust, per COM:PRP. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:22, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

 Delete File:Gene Deal During Interview.jpg per above, the image is from a reuploaded video, but the original video is here , which doesn’t have a CC license. You can see the logo of the original YouTube channel “TheArtOfDialogue” on the bottom left of the reuploaded video. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that's just what I'd expected. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

 Delete as nomination. I would agree, there is no credible situation where these are freely licensed by being the work of the uploader. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

 Keep File:Big U During 2020 Interview.jpg MILLION DOLLAZ WORTH OF GAME is a 1.73M subscribers podcast channel

 Keep File:Bruse Wane Interview screen shot.jpg/File:Bruse Wane In A 2022 Interview.jpg (These are the same) own work of the uploader look at the video

 Keep File:Charlie Rock LD During Podcast.jpg this is Charlie Rock LD own channel

 Keep File:Bruse Wane Performing at Smash Studio.jpg, File:Bruse Wane performing in New York.jpg this is Bruse Wane's own channel

File:Gene Deal During Interview.jpg  Delete this terrible quality image whether it's the right license or not I got a better one by Anything Goes With James English podcast here File:Gene_Deal_2024.jpg  ${\displaystyle 999}$REAL 💬 ⬆   17:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

These seem to be missing the point. Sure, it's a million-subscriber channel, it's an important image and adds to articles. But it's not ours to use. That's the problem here. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:46, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

?????????????  ${\displaystyle 999}$REAL 💬 ⬆   20:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Who shot the footage is I think what we are trying to work out. The question has come about because Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disco King Mario.jpg got tagged with a CC license, but the footage was clearly from ABC. You can't just slap a copyrighted video on Youtube, claim it as CC then upload it to Commons. This makes all subsequent uploads suspect. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 20:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

None of these are from that same channel. All of these are clearly original by the various uploaders on YouTube except maybe File:Bruse Wane Performing at Smash Studio.jpg,File:Bruse Wane performing in New York.jpg since Bruse Wane didn't take the video himself  ${\displaystyle 999}$REAL 💬 ⬆   20:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Can I clarify something here... File:Bruse Wane Performing at Smash Studio.jpg is a screenshot from a Youtube video from WaneEnt, and it appears to be a video he shot of a performance at Smash Studios in New York. It is currently tagged correctly on the Youtube video with a CC-BY unported license. Are we saying that the original video has been tagged incorrectly and WaneEnt doesn't have the rights to the video? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

These files should not be deleted or up event up for deletion as they are properly licensed, attributed and are not copyright violations. The files are in use under permission granted by the copyright owners to others under, the Creative Commons License of the original content on Youtube. They are in use on Wikimedia under the  Attribution 3.0 License which allows others to share, adapt, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as they give the rights holder proper credit.

It appears all these files were nominated for deletion in one fell swoop, without the license and usage of each file being properly evaluated.

The (Disco King Mario) file, was deleted almost immediately without a proper discussion. It may have not warranted deletion, (aside from being low quality, but images of a lower grade are allowed to exist on wikipedia and commons). It may not have warranted deletion based on the original date in footage was created and, we don't know under the license it was released. What license it was released under is another unknown variable that was not factored into its hasty deletion. The claim is the footage has an ABC water mark but it originally aired on the 60 minutes news show in the 1970's. We don't know what license ABC news used to release the footage, which is all over the internet, and YouTube. I think that file should be undeleted, and I did put in a request.

The other files can be more pin pointed as 100% Original content that was uploaded to YouTube by the content creator and marked with a CC By a Creative Commons License granting others permission to re use and edit the work. If someone reuploads content from YouTube that was already marked with a Creative Commons license, and makes the footage once again available under a creative commons license what rights are being violated. Even it the footage is a complete duplicate, on another Channel.

I’m sure everyone is well versed on this. However I have left a full break down of Youtube Creative Commons below after the next passage: I don’t believe we should make assumptions of bad intent or deception and deal strictly with what has been provided to us. If who definitively filmed the footage without a shadow of a doubt was a rock solid prerequisite of Creative Commons usage It would probably state that. We were not there to see for certain how the footage came into existence . in most cases we don't know how the original core creator released the content to the public. Unless there are abviously glaring red flags and inconsistencies I believe we should deal with the clear guidelines being met not assumptions of bad faith or intent. (was the license granted and is it the content being used under proper attribution and licensing.) That is all wikipedia requires to cover copyright violation liability.

Creative Commons on YouTube

Creative Commons

licenses give a standard way for content creators to grant someone else permission to use their work. YouTube allows creators to mark their videos with a Creative Commons

CC BY

license.

If you've marked your video with a CC BY license, you retain your copyright. Other creators get to reuse your work subject to the terms of the license.

The ability to mark uploaded videos with a Creative Commons license is available to all creators.

The standard YouTube license remains the default setting for all uploads. To review the terms of the standard YouTube license, refer to our Terms of Service.

Creative Commons licenses can only be used on 100% original content. If there's a Content ID claim on your video, you cannot mark your video with the Creative Commons license.

By marking your original video with a Creative Commons license, you're granting the entire YouTube community the right to reuse and edit that video.

What's eligible for a Creative Commons license

You can only mark your uploaded video with a Creative Commons license if it's all content that you can license under the CC BY license. Some examples of such licensable content are:

• Your originally created content
• Other videos marked with a CC BY license
• Videos in the public domain

Edward Myer (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Sabah Museum 27 December 2023 137.jpg

This file was initially tagged by BujangLapok05 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: This photo depicts a copyrighted sculpture located inside the Sabah Museum (Malaysia), where Freedom of Panorama does not apply indoors. The sculpture is not confirmed to be in the public domain. Therefore, the image is likely in violation of COM:FOP#Malaysia and COM:PRP. BujangLapok05 (talk) 07:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Converted to regular DR, as is default for FoP-violation-cases. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:49, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Sabah Museum 27 December 2023 138.jpg

This file was initially tagged by User:BujangLapok05 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: This photo depicts a copyrighted sculpture located inside the Sabah Museum (Malaysia), where Freedom of Panorama does not apply indoors. The sculpture is not confirmed to be in the public domain. Therefore, the image is likely in violation of COM:FOP#Malaysia and COM:PRP.
Converted to regular DR, as is default for FoP-violation-cases. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Sabah Museum 27 December 2023 139.jpg

This file was initially tagged by User:BujangLapok05 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: This photo depicts a copyrighted sculpture located inside the Sabah Museum (Malaysia), where Freedom of Panorama does not apply indoors. The sculpture is not confirmed to be in the public domain. Therefore, the image is likely in violation of COM:FOP#Malaysia and COM:PRP. BujangLapok05 (talk) 07:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Converted to regular DR, as is default for FoP-violation-cases. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Category:Henry G. Gilbert Nursery and Seed Trade Catalog Collection

This DR initially concerns the category listed, with the exception of /checked subcategory. Recently the pre 1929 were helpfully relicensed, however a broader search found at least 20,000 files with in error licensing.

That search being insource:"Henry G. Gilbert Nursery and Seed Trade Catalog Collection" incategory:"FEDLINK - United States Federal Collection"

Most of these are post 1930, and are wrongly licensed as PD-USGov, NONE are ( and this seems to have been an unresolved issue at upload that was never resolved.)

As more than several years later these are STILL incorrectly licensed, Fae left the project a while ago, and there doesn't seem to be anyone stepping forward to resolve this.

Delete on the basis that checking 20,000 or files is "too difficult". In deletion, tag for a undeletion date as the copyrights on these CLEARLY expire, however.

(tldr) Curate or remove, it's unreasonable for in error licensing to persist indefinitely due to seeming indifference. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Colegiul Național “Mircea cel Bătrân“.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Ziv as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://adevarul.ro/stiri-locale/ramnicu-valcea/rezultate-bacalaureat-2022-valcea-locul-iii-pe-2176511.html
Converted to regular DR to allow discussion of this case. The uploaded image seems to be a rather meticulously "photoshopped" version of an image that was uploaded elsewhere (link above) in 2022 and credited to Constantin Drăghici. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Túrelio I modified this photograph and mistakenly labeled it as my own work. I sincerely apologize for this error. I understand that this does not comply with Wikimedia Commons copyright policies. I accept that the file may be deleted if necessary and will be more careful in the future. This happened because I did not fully understand how to correctly register or license an image. Now, with the help and guidance I’ve received from the community, I hope everything will be in order going forward. I want to make it very clear that this was not done in bad faith. I am not a liar, as one administrator implied. It was simply a mistake made while trying to contribute with good intentions.

Thank you for your understanding. ~~~~ Claudiupt (talk) 14:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Derivative work of a copyrighted photo without permission. --Pafsanias (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Сергей Арцибашев.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Quick1984 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Taken from /
Converted to regular DR, as a permission might have been sent to VRT. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

• Ticket:2025061110004257 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 11:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Mel Renfro Hall of Fame bust.jpg

Depicted sculpture is likely still in full copyright and freedom-of-panorama exception is unlikely applicable here (indoors; location?). -- Túrelio (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Same problem with:

• File:Drew Pearson HOF Bust.jpg
• File:Roger Staubach HOF Bust.jpg
• File:Jerry Jones HOF Bust.jpg
• File:Cliff Harris HOF Bust.jpg
• File:Dallas Cowboys Bobbleheads.jpg
• File:Rayfield Wright Hall of Fame bust.jpg
• File:Randy White Hall of Fame bust.jpg

File:45 ПОП.png

Файл не відповідає дійсності. Зараз у 45 полку НГУ інший нарукавний знак. OfficerNGU (talk) 11:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Це не привід вилучати файл колишнього зображення. Завантажуйте нове зображення відповідно до правил і оновлюйте використання.--82.117.229.78 16:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

It is a historical patch of the 45th regiment. Those files and images are not being deleted, they're being shown as part of the unit's history. It has also a valid free license. VoidWanderer (talk) 12:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Sandra Sándor.jpg

Suspected copyright violation: claimed own work 2025, but the image has been previously published in https://www.nanushka.com/pages/about-us. The date given does not match EXIF date (august 2024). MKFI (talk) 11:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, there was a mistake in my citing, the image does belong to Nanushka and was published in 2024. Is it possible to chance the date of publishing, rather then to have the image deleted? Thank you. Nanushka2005 (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@Nanushka2005: I have changed the date, please confirm that it is correct. Since the image has been published previously it best that you verify copyright with a VRT message. You can use Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator. MKFI (talk) 18:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, confirming this is correct! Nanushka2005 (talk) 09:36, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

If you are the copyright holder, please email our permissions verification team (VRT).

→

--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Files in Category:Office of the Ombudsman Building in the Philippines

Recent building, implied by this article; it was built during the time of former Ombudsman w:en:Aniano A. Desierto, who was an Ombudsman from 1995 to 2002. Recent means still under architectural copyright. Since there is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines, these commercially-licensed images are infringements to the architectural copyright.

• File:Central Quezon City Metro Manila 07.jpg
• File:Central Quezon City Metro Manila 08.jpg
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 01.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 03.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 04.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 05.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 06.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 07.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 08.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 09.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 10.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 12.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 13.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 14.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 15.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 16.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 17.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 18.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 19.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 20.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 21.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 22.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 23.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 24.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 25.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 26.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 28.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 29.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 30.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 31.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 32.JPG
• File:FvfOmbudsman0222 33.JPG

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 12:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Dennis Amir Kharazmi 2025.jpg

Copyvio: Permission by copyright holder Lea Mahler? 2003:C0:8F32:BB00:85C3:445F:6C58:B54F 13:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Seems to be a pretty clear case: Uploader has admitted to having bought the usage rights only and not being the copyright holder. --2003:C0:8F32:BB00:31F1:C89F:F826:BA6 14:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

• Ticket:2025061210009376 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 18:00, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Spiez Schoneggstrasse 1.jpg

This is a private house, no one asked the owners for permission to photograph it or publish such photos. 178.197.202.218 13:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

 Keep: Kein Löschgrund, eine Genehmigung ist nicht erforderlich. Siehe auch de:Recht am Bild der eigenen Sache. --Achim55 (talk) 13:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Spielankündigungsplakat der SG 06 Betzdorf im Eurogreen Stadion "Auf dem Bühl".jpg

Schon bald zehn Jahre alt und wird nicht genutzt. MattesKoeln (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:إمامة طرابلس الإباضية في أقصى اتساع لها.jpg

According to the uploader's own description, this is an original work with no reliable sources. As per COM:EDUSE guidelines, this content is irrelevant and lacks educational value. The user keeps uploading original works (exaggerated personal maps and fictional flags) and adding them to arwiki, despite several warnings to stop doing so. He has ignored all remarks. Riad Salih (talk) 15:15, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:خريطة خلافة بنوا قرة.jpg

According to the uploader's own description, this is an original work with no reliable sources. As per COM:EDUSE guidelines, this content is irrelevant and lacks educational value. The user keeps uploading original works (exaggerated personal maps and fictional flags) and adding them to arwiki, despite several warnings to stop doing so. He has ignored all remarks. Riad Salih (talk) 15:15, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Files in Category:IMovie

Not in public domain - The iMovie icon for iOS was published on October 22, 2013 (web archive) and was approved for copyright registration (Registration record VA0001903909) the following year.

• File:IMovie Icon iOS.jpg
• File:IOS iMovie.png

0x0a (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Dr. salamoun 265x397.jpg

No evidence this photo is licensed under the OGL-C license. This photo is still under Crown Copyright; https://www.assembly.pe.ca/copyright "The user acknowledges that the copyright in all material contained herein is claimed by the Legislative Assembly on behalf of, and rests with, Her Majesty the Queen/King in Right of the Province of Prince Edward Island. No person may reproduce the material contained herein by any means for financial gain, or for other than personal use, without the express written consent of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly." Canadian government works by default are under copyright; not automatically released under a free license like other countries. PascalHD (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Я.Н. Логвиненко.jpg

In case the author is unknown, the term of the author's life can't be a rationale for PD statement. The date of first publication is needed to meet COM:Russia terms. Romano1981 (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Ишеналы Арабаев.jpg

In case the author is unknown, the term of the author's life can't be a rationale for PD statement. Romano1981 (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

 Keep it was created in 1920 and is therefore in the public domain. Incall ^talk 20:18, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

User:Incall, I took a look at your talk page and I think you are in a hurry to get various flags without understanding many of the WM Commons rules. If you refrain from making statements that do not comply with the policies, but try to read {{PD-Kyrgyzstan}} instead, you'll find out, that there's not a word about the date of creation, while the first publication date is needed to start the counter. Romano1981 (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Я вижу то что вы понимаете русский, начнем, я не спешу получать флаги. Так как я проверил около 200 файлов на лицензии как минимум. Ну второе буквально тут и написано что файл сделал в 1920 году , вы могли открыть и взглянуть на это и удостовериться о том что он реально сделан в 1920 году. А не пытаться принизить меня. И кстати зачем вы отметили что бы я прочитал этот шаблон, если там от смерти автора 50 лет? К тому же я последние пол года достаточно много сидел в DR и могу уверенно сказать что этот файл находиться в общественном достоянии. Incall ^talk 13:50, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Сомнения, что вы понимаете как английский, так и русский текст, теперь только усилились. Приведённый шаблон содержит текст 50 years have passed since the date of its publication, и вы его найдёте, если постараетесь. Очень жаль, что администраторы не глядя доверяют флаг проверки лицензий неопытным участникам, затрудняющимся разобраться в таких простых вопросах. сидел в DR — мда, без комментариев. Думаю, что ваши действия необходимо перепроверять. Romano1981 (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Ну давайте подождем административного итога, и вот объясните суть. Неизвестен автор, но известно в каком году он был сделан, то есть это 1920. Объясните каким боком его нужно удалить? Тоесть этот неизвестный автор, умер рантше 50 лет назад? Incall ^talk 14:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Беда. Жаль, что я не владею языком, который вы в состоянии понять. Romano1981 (talk) 14:21, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Гапур Ахриев.jpg

In case the author is unknown, the term of the author's life can't be a rationale for PD statement. The date of first publication is needed to meet COM:Russia terms. Romano1981 (talk) 17:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

 Keep This person died in 1920, which means the photograph was taken before that year and is therefore in the public domain. Incall ^talk 20:23, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

User:Incall, try to read the above again. No matter when the photo was allegedly created, the date it was first published is needed to prove being in the PD. Romano1981 (talk) 13:14, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

По этой логике можно удалить все фотографии сделанные и с 19 веке, отталкиваясь тем что «нет даты» хотя он умер в 1890 годах. А тут ваши слова не поддаются логике, тоесть его фотография была сделана в его гробу? Если он умер в 1920 году, то фотография сделана до 1920 года и это просто факт. Incall ^talk 13:59, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Incall, совсем плохо. Тут вопрос даже не в знании правил Commons, а о трудностях в понимании элементарных принципов авторского права. Попробую объяснить на пальцах. Попытайтесь понять разницу между словами "создание / creation" и "публикация / publication". Ещё подробнее: кто-то сделал фото в 1920 году. В дальнейшем это фото могло быть либо опубликовано общедоступным образом (например, в газете) в 1920-м или 1921 году либо могло оказаться в домашнем архиве фотографа, пролежать там хоть 100 лет, и стать достоянием общественности много позже даты создания, скажем, в 2020 году. Так вот, если это наконец понятно, то продолжение таково: в законодательстве многих стран отсчёт 50 или 70 лет, дающих возможность считать работу находящейся в общественном достоянии, идёт не от даты создания (например, 1920+70), а от даты первой правомерной публикации (например, 2020+70). Так, например, многие фотографии В. И. Ленина, не опубликованные до открытия архивов в 1991 году, ещё много лет будут защищены авторским правом. Объявляя нечто находящимся в общественном достоянии, вы должны ссылаться не на своё "сидение в DR" (), а предъявить доказательство публикации — ознакомьтесь с правилами COM:EVID/ru и COM:PCP/ru, давно пора было это сделать, раз уж вы осмеливаетесь проверять правомерность загрузки файлов других участников. Romano1981 (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Такие фотографии делались для газет, которые всегда публиковались сразу после его создания. Как показывала практика в Киргизской ССР. Потому что Кыргызстан это не Россия где люди могли хранить архивы годами. Incall ^talk 14:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Легче не стало. Попробуйте всё-таки прочитать текст приведённых выше правил (судя по быстроте вашего бессмысленного ответа, вы этого не сделали) и попытаться осмыслить его. Дальше потребуется понять разницу между словами "мнение" и "доказательство". Никому нет никакого дела до того, каково ваше мнение, что там "показывала практика". Либо вы предъявляете доказательство публикации, либо воздерживаетесь от пустых слов. Romano1981 (talk) 14:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Дайте какое то время, могу в архив сгонять и спросить как там и что там. Если понадобиться могу сфотографировать что там если нужны доказательства. Incall ^talk 14:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Ну не пришлось в архив идти нашел на фейсбуке фотографию и там снизу написано что она была опубликована, а не сделана в 1923 году . Incall ^talk 14:37, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Как же тяжело с вами. Начнём с того, что вы ухитрились перепутать обсуждение, дав ссылку на фото, обсуждаемое не на этой странице, а здесь: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ишеналы Арабаев.jpg. Далее, откуда же это следует? По-киргизски то вы уверенно читаете? Надпись под фотографией гласит: Такие-то в Ташкенте в 1923 году (фото публикуется впервые). Судя по заголовку "110-летие И. Арабаева", это публикация 1882 + 110 = 1992 года. Если верить этим словам, фото, согласно {{PD-Uzbekistan}}, перейдёт в общественное достояние в 1992 + 50 = 2042 году. Только надо будет ещё доказать, что оно было опубликовано анонимно, и автор не стал известен на протяжении 50 лет. Вот здесь указан архив, где хранится фото. Можете попробовать выяснить дату публикации там. На будущее: доказательство публикации в таком-то году выглядит так: File:Папанин Иван Дмитриевич 1.jpg, см. ссылку в поле Source. Romano1981 (talk) 15:04, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Может вместо гугла гпт хотя б перевести, да и я на связь вышел с автором поста на фейсбуке хочу его ответ услышать, на счет книги и тд. Incall ^talk 16:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Ну впринципе проверим, я тож не прям уж шарю за кыргызский но все равно, если книга напечатана недавно, то получается там в смысле о том что она опубликована в 1923, а если достаточно давно то я схожу в архив и дам свой ответ и если нужно, могу сфотографировать эту газету если конечно она была изначально в газете. Incall ^talk 17:10, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Нет, никак там не "получается, что опубликована в 1923". Romano1981 (talk) 17:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Ну посмотрим, честно если мне в архиве все расскажут то я перенесу в Рувики этот файл а тут зачеркну свой  Keep. Я поговорил с одним админом викисклада и он мне посоветовал найти. Incall ^talk 20:13, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Mousterian in Ingushetia.jpg

Copyright violation. Taken from the internet Yousiphh (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

•  Comment @Yousiphh: From where? Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Delegation of representatives of the Mountain Republic (1920).jpg

The same as File:Leaders of the Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus.jpg Yousiphh (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:N-cauc-moun-peop-republic.jpg

The same as File:Leaders of the Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus.jpg Yousiphh (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Tun Dr. Mahathir - panoramio.jpg

No Freedom of Panorama in Malaysia: This file shows a mural of Malaysian political figure Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, painted on a wall in Malaysia. However, Malaysia does not allow Freedom of Panorama (FoP) for artistic works such as murals. Therefore, this image cannot be hosted on Commons unless the uploader can provide clear permission from the mural's artist. Although the file was originally uploaded to Panoramio, this does not override Malaysian copyright law or meet Commons licensing requirements. See COM:FOP Malaysia. BujangLapok05 (talk) 20:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

 Keep, wrong. COM:FOP Malaysia says otherwise. Even in the English text of the latest (2022) version of the Copyright Act provided by Malaysia's Intellectual Property Corporation, it states under Section 13(2): "Notwithstanding subsection (1), the right of control under that subsection does not include the right to control — ... (d) the reproduction and distribution of copies of any artistic work permanently situated in a place where it can be viewed by the public. (That is, very sufficient FoP for artistic works permanently situated in public places.) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

It seems that the mural, which was created in 2015, was removed by the authorities just recently (May 2025), for "repair" purposes. Perhaps that may have triggered this deletion request, but as far as I know, removal doesn't mean it magically becomes "non permanent", since the work was meant to be permanent when it was first made. For added info, the three authors of this work, per this, are Mustakim Ismail, Abdul Qoyyum Mohd Nadzri, and Mohd Zulfadli Ahmad Nawawi. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I was not aware of the 2022 amendment to Malaysia's Copyright Act that provides Freedom of Panorama for permanent public artworks. Based on this, I withdraw my deletion request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BujangLapok05 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@BujangLapok05 it was not an amendment; it already existed for some time now. See this WIPO Lex link to the 2001 version of the law, the FoP clause already exists under the same section (on page 19 of the document). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 04:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

The FoP clause helped us host many familiar permanent artistic works from Malaysia, like the Petronas Towers, Merdeka 118, Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Mosque, and Tugu Negara sculpture (National Monument). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 04:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Dignitaries on the dias watching Republic day parade 2023.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Shaan Sengupta as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Modi's personal X handle. Needs review from an expert on GODL-India. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag Map Of Germany Nazi (Version2).svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Henrykez (talk) 21:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag Map Of Germany Nazi (Version1).svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 21:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Total metal at Kulturhuset, Stockholm 2025.webm

Dubblett. Original: Utställningen Total metal på Kulturhuset 2025.webm FrankieF (talk) 22:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Total metal på Kulturhuset, Stockholm 2025.webm

Dubblett. Original: Utställningen Total metal på Kulturhuset 2025.webm FrankieF (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Chile flag map (Claims to Antarctica included).svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag Map Of Chile.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag map of the United States of America (including overseas territories).svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:EcuadorLocation.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:32, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Rings Of Saturn.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Rings Of Neptune.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Rings Of Uranus.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Chile Flag Map.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag-map of the Republic of Chile.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Bolivia.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Flag-Map Of Ecuador.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Capitaniachileterraaustralismejor.png

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:America del sur contorno transparente.svg

Chile in South America (+Easter Islands).svg Henrykez (talk) 22:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:South America And Antarctica. (claims).svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Map of Chile.svg

Subí a commons una versión mejorada del mapa. Solo busco borrar mi trabajo por no estar completo. Henrykez (talk) 22:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Nymphaea capensis লাল শালুক.jpg

The resolution of this image is low and it is blurry. I believe this image won't be of any educational use. Conan Wolff (talk) 23:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Yaqublu Mustafa ağa Şəkibəyov.png

Copyright violation. Taken from the internet and the same as File:Mustafa ağa Şəkibəyov.png Yousiphh (talk) 23:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Mustafa ağa Şəkibəyov.png

Copyright violation. Taken from the internet and the same as File:Yaqublu Mustafa ağa Şəkibəyov.png Yousiphh (talk) 23:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Algeria-independence-day-2022-6753651837109621-2xa.gif

This file was previously kept as being supposedly below the threshold of originality. I sincerely doubt this to be true. It's an animated gif of a flag flying on a sky background. There was clearly creativity put into the animation and design. Even by American standards (which has a high bar for TOO) this is way too unique and high-effort to be below the TOO. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 23:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

•  Keep Per TOO and the above nomination, the doodle features the Algerian flag with a simple blue sky, without many distinctive elements. Similarly, the animation doesn't introduce any unique or innovative aspects. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)