Commons:Deletion requests/2024/01/06

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
5 January 2024
7 January 2024
Deletion requests on 6 January 2024

January 6[edit]

File:Öznur Çalık.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Kadı as no permission (No permission since). 2014 upload, should be discussed. Previous version before cropping had full EXIF (Nikon D3100). Please explain why you doubt this is own work. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:32, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@King of Hearts, The uploader uploaded a photo recently which was taken from Twitter, I deleted it because of copyright infringements. We discussed it here in trwiki, you can check via Google Translate. Kadı Message 08:29, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MMR 1537.JPG[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Kadı as no permission (No permission since)

2015 upload, should be discussed. Please explain why you doubt this is own work. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@King of Hearts, The uploader uploaded a photo recently which was taken from Twitter, I deleted it because of copyright infringements. We discussed it here in trwiki, you can check via Google Translate. Kadı Message 08:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Emal.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Malarz pl as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: copyrighted logo: https://emalia.eu/category/kontakt-o-firmie https://emalia.eu/uploads/collections/14/657f4b47b02fb-0.png . Stated license is presumably useless (barring COM:VRT approval of permission) but it might be below the threshold of originality. I believe this is for Poland, so that threshold is low, though. Jmabel ! talk 08:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Interfaz Ms Project Professional 2016.png[edit]

This was tagged with {{Fairuse}} but I don't see any claim of fair use here. I do see a probably bogus license tag, but as far as I can see there is nothing copyrightable here (might depend on what country we consider to be the country of origin). The few at all imaginably copyrighted icons look de minimis. Jmabel ! talk 08:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Planta Fábrica do Cavalinho.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Tm as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: A architectural plant produced and delivered to an municipality to license constructions works is not a publication. Tm (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC) I don't think that is clearcut enough for a speedy deletion, and I'm converting to a DR to allow time for discussion. Jmabel ! talk 09:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep, these plans by collective person "Sociedade Mercantil do Minho, Lda." were disclosed upon submission to the Municipal Council of Guimarães on April 30, 1923. The Cavalinho Spinning and Weaving Factory was then built according to these plans, further disclosing and effectively publishing these plans to the workers, vendors, and passers-by before expansion in 1934. They therefore qualify under this section of the third reason in {{PD-Portugal-URAA}}: "a work by a collective person whose authors were not individually identified, published or disclosed before 1946".   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Keep, for the same reasons stated by Jeff G. V.B.Speranza (talk) 21:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Traffic .jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Fenikals as Screenshot. Not obvious to me (Jmabel) that there is anything here above the threshold of originality. Jmabel ! talk 09:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Independence Proclamation of Jamaica.jpg[edit]

There may be copyright issues. Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 11:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Khartoum locality.png[edit]

There may be copyright issues. Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 11:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Donald Trump NYMA (colorized).jpg[edit]

There may be copyright issues. Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Coat of arms of the Commonwealth of Philippines (cropped).png[edit]

There may be copyright issues. Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 11:29, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Republic of China (Taiwan) Territorial Claims.jpg[edit]

There may be copyright issues. Mr. James Dimsey (talk) 11:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Nerd271 (talk · contribs)[edit]

not cc-by-sa, maybe copyvio or no permission

shizhao (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Public domain
  • From the 19th century.
  • This book cover features Carnot's cycle in thermodynamics.
  • This book cover features the Stern-Gerlach experiment in quantum mechanics.
  • This is an illustration of a possible orbital trajectory.
  • These are Poisson's equations in electricity and magnetism.

Nerd271 (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sergei B. Korolev young.jpg[edit]

Random PD rationale, ridiculous 'own work' claim, photo is made in the Soviet Union, no any indication of publication in US. Komarof (talk) 12:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files found with Special:Search/2015112010003179[edit]

All these PDFs refer to ticket:2015112010003179 which was never successfully closed. Hence, we never got a written permission from the respective authors.

AFBorchert (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AFBorchert: I don't understand. I don't have access to the ticket and cannot figure out what I need to do here. Tagging for deletion all these books that a tiny Wikimedia community has worked hard to negotiate with authors on the basis of something that is opaque to me or rest of the community members is probably not the best solution. What was the reason the ticket was not closed? What was really missing from the community and/or the authors? Psubhashish (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Psubhashish: It is quite simple, those who we were in contact with were never able or willing to obtain written permission for the release under a free license from the respective copyright owners of these books. --AFBorchert (talk) 18:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was in touch with the Copyright Owner and I have in front of me an email to OTRS from the Owner on November 20th, 2015, containing all the titles tagged. Sorry to be blunt, but your response sounds like preaching to the choir, and indicates that the effort of small communities does not matter. It would be a collective harrassment to go back and ask the Owner to write to OTRS when the 2015 email is per the process, leaving any room for confusion. Please share your email so that I could forward you the original email. Psubhashish (talk) 02:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Psubhashish: I have read the entire conversation archived at VRT. None of this included the required permission from the individual authors of these books. It is neither the fault of the VRT member at that time handling the ticket nor mine that these permissions are still missing. The problem behind this is a significant misunderstanding of copyright. Under normal circumstances contracts between authors and publishers do not include the right to relicense the works under a free license. The publisher could neither present proof of such a right nor did we have permissions from any of the authors for such a release. I understand that this might be frustrating but we cannot keep these works at Commons without the necessary permissions. All this was patiently explained within the correspondence. No response came after the last email was sent by the VRT member on 8 January 2016. All these files were uploaded afterwards in March 2016 without the necessary confirmation from VRT. If you want to do something about it you have to contact all the individual authors asking them for permissions. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am aware of the copyright issues when we're dealing with magazines with multiple authors. The 109 volumes of ବିଜ୍ଞାନ ତରଙ୍ଗ (Bigyan Taranga) magazine published during 1988-2007 would be the affected ones where different articles have different authors outside of Srujanika, and hence Puspashree Pattnaik's relicensing would not cover those specific articles. But, it's ridiculous when the book metadata page, for instance this one, mentions the author as Puspashree Pattnaik and the organisation Srujanika being the copyright holder, and her email to VRT clearly mentions that she as the representative of Srujanika is relicensing it under a Wiki Commons-compatible CC License. You yet chose to arbitrarily tag all such books by assuming that copyright migration was not successful, making our entire effort futile. Psubhashish (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Psubhashish: We do not need representatives or publishers, we need the permissions from all authors involved. Please take the time and get familiar with copyright law, in particular with the restrictions of an assignment of copyright according to chapter IV in Indian copyright law. Let me quote from Ishan Sambhar, India: Assignment and Licensing of Copyright: However, mere grant of right to publish and sell the copyrighted work amounts to publishing right and not assignment of copyright. The article refers to the decision Video Master v. Nishi where the Bombay High Court decided that an assignment of video rights did not include the right of satellite broadcast as well. In summary, if we do not have proof that the written contract regarding the assignment of copyright includes the unusual right of relicensing the work, it is still the reserved right of the respective owners as first owner of copyright to decide whether they want to relicense their works or not. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course. That said, Srujanika, the publisher in this case, owns the copyright. On the top of that, Puspashree Pattnaik herself is author of some of the books, as I shared in the last message here. The books you've flagged are Srujanika's own publications and they own the copyrights. Bigyan Taranga, the magazine they published, that are not yet uploaded to Commons, contain articles owned by multiple authors. Psubhashish (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Psubhashish: This does not cover books like File:Saikelara Kahani.pdf or File:Kimiara Bigyana.pdf that were written by other authors. All files need a confirmation through VRT. You do not get this through this deletion request, the conversation with VRT has to be re-opened for any files here you want to keep. Without VRT confirmation all files will be deleted. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you in that remove tags from books that Srujanika owns copyright of? It makes no sense when Puspashree Pattnaik is the author, and hence, copyright holder of File:Maja Bigyana Parakha.pdf, and has permitted through VRT, and yet that book is tagged for deletion. Who else is expected to provide permission? Psubhashish (talk) 17:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This concerns File:Saikelara Kahani.pdf. However, the credits at p. 4 name Vijay Gupta as original author of the English text who remains unnamed in the file description. Jeeban Kumar Panda has apperently translated the book from English to the Odia language. We need permissions from both. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AFBorchert can you please remove deletion tag from books like File:Maja Bigyana Parakha.pdf as she is the moral and copyright holder of a book like that, and has already provided permission? That way, it would be clearer which books actually would need further permission, like the example you've shared in your last message. I have very little mental and physical bandwidth and no other community member is available to trouble two seventy-year-olds who are busy archiving thousands of books, like machines. In worst case, books like File:Saikelara Kahani.pdf will vanish from Commons and Wikisource, and would continue to live elsewhere on the internet. Fuck copyright (sorry for my language but I an done at the moment seeing years of collective endeavour going in vain)! Psubhashish (talk) 14:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:しおり.jpg[edit]

Apparently a scan from a printed leaflet (as the filename and category suggest). Text is highly likely copyrighted, thus a possible copyvio. Yasu (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:表彰状.jpg[edit]

Issued in 1966 (the 41st year of the Showa era), the text depicted is copyrighted. Thus the file makes an infringement of literary copyright. Yasu (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:甘晴堂店舗前にて.jpg[edit]

According to the file description, the photo was shot in early Showa era (circa 1930s). Uploader's own work claim is highly unlikely. Yasu (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Thxbn (talk · contribs)[edit]

Bogus CC licenses. Might be in the public domain but a source is needed for verification.

--Minorax«¦talk¦» 15:45, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And:

--0x0a (talk) 13:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Premier Donald Tusk KPRM.jpg[edit]

The file's usage was justified by Template:gov.pl, which does not apply here, as the photo was taken and uploaded after August 19, 2022. Additionally, on Flickr, the photo's license is set to "All rights reserved" [1]. Max19582 (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

https://www.gov.pl/web/primeminister/donald-tusk (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanisław Krupiński (talk • contribs) Reply[reply]

@Stanisław Krupiński: While the source is indeed gov.pl, this usage is not justified here. Gov.pl works can only be used for media from August 19, 2022 and earlier: look at Template:Gov.pl. Max19582 (talk) 00:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

,,All content published on this website is covered by a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 PL license, unless stated otherwise." – https://web.archive.org/web/20240115221246/https://www.gov.pl/web/primeminister/donald-tusk (talk) 23:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanisław Krupiński (talk • contribs) Reply[reply]

Weird, the same text says something different when you view the website in Polish - https://www.gov.pl/web/premier/donald-tusk
Wszystkie treści publikowane w serwisie są udostępniane na licencji Creative Commons: uznanie autorstwa - użycie niekomercyjne - bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Polska (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 PL), o ile nie jest to stwierdzone inaczej.
Not quite sure which license is applicable here then. Max19582 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Odette Laurent-Lucas-Championnière.jpg[edit]

photo copiée sur un site, ne donne aucune indication qu'elle est libre de droits Pierrette13 (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Monument to Samuil, Sofia 2015-06-30.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Nk as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: rather (un)famous work of a known author, bg:Александър Хайтов

Yes, but the photograph does appear to be an own work so this is a FoP case. No FoP in Bulgaria and the sculptor as linked above is still living. Abzeronow (talk) 17:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is exactly what I had in mind. :) In fact the same argument can be applied to the whole Category:Monument to Samuil, Sofia. --Спас Колев (talk) 19:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Created a separate DR for the other files Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Monument to Samuil, Sofia Abzeronow (talk) 19:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:1 BILLO TIBERIO La Pentecôte 1565 ? Huile sur toile - 305 cm x 554 cm - Musée des Beaux Arts de Chartres.png[edit]

demande externe Jmkaelin (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

28 fichiers différents avec le même nom ?[edit]

Comment expliquer que les 28 fichiers de Category:Paintings by Tiberio Billò in the museum of Chartres peuvent avoir le même nom avec des contenus différents ? Au-delà de cette question probablement due à un bug, le fichier File:1 BILLO TIBERIO La Pentecôte 1565 ? Huile sur toile - 305 cm x 554 cm - Musée des Beaux Arts de Chartres.png est bien référencé, comme indiqué précédemment, donc à conserver. Bien cordialement, Le Passant (talk) 07:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a reference for this file ![edit]

How to explain that 28 files of Category:Paintings by Tiberio Billò in the museum of Chartres got the same name with different contents ?

The file File:1 BILLO TIBERIO La Pentecôte 1565 ? Huile sur toile - 305 cm x 554 cm - Musée des Beaux Arts de Chartres.png has this reference : La Pentecôte, un tableau maniériste siennois and, therefore, must not be suppressed. The 27 others files have no reference and have to be suppressed. Le Passant (talk) 10:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Monument C00043.JPG[edit]

The monument in question was only erected in 1995. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 19:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dayforball.jpg[edit]

A screenshot from some video. It's unclear, though, if it's really the user's / uploader's own work or just a screenshot from some third party video material for which no claim of ownership can really be made by the user / uploader. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 19:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS. Now that I'm thinking of it again, it could even be a screenshot from some printed material like a magazine (see the bluish lights around the middle of the photo and close to the terrain that don't match at all with the black or even white colours that caracterize PAOK and its fans). --🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 19:52, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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:Vernalis ^ Vaniglia - Flickr - Michael Beat.jpg[edit]

the original source of the file no longer exists Cambrinocambrino (talk) 17:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep. That isn't a reason for deletion. Omphalographer (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Vernalis ^ Vaniglia - Flickr - Michael Beat.jpg[edit]

if you check the source you will find a page on flickr which does not exist. I am also in contact with the two people pictured as legal representatives. They do not agree to their faces being shared on Wikimedia commons. I ask you to remove the photo immediately. Otherwise we will consider legal action. 194.230.144.229 20:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by ByaduniaEspoir[edit]

User:ByaduniaEspoir has uploaded many pictures that I think are in copyright violation for various reasons:

[UPDATE January 7] : turns out User:ByaduniaEspoir was a sockpuppet of User:EdwinAlden.1995, warned multiple times and blocked for copyright violation. ByaduniaEspoir is now blocked indefinitely:

-

List of files to delete because there's no freedom of panorama in DRC (COM:FOP DRC) and because they were often published on non-free websites before date of upload on Commons :

List of files which are clearly COM:DW (pictures taken of paper photographs) and which I do not believe meet the criteria to be public domain in DRC. Indeed, COM:Democratic Republic of the Congo states that photos are public domain 25 years after publishing. Unfortunately, we don't have any information about : 1/ whether those pictures were indeed publicly published at the time they were taken (the fact it's COM:DW and there's no better quality versions, along with the fact it doesn't seem like professional / promotional pictures, makes me think these pictures were taken for a private use) and 2/ if they were indeed published, in which country that was (they were almost all taken in other countries than DRC) :

Some plain copyright violations :

Other :

Thank you --Titlutin (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2024/01/06&oldid=849103223"