Commons:Deletion requests/2023/12/23

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
22 December 2023
24 December 2023
Deletion requests on 23 December 2023

December 23[edit]

File:Drapeau samnite.png[edit]

The file is misleading. The source for it, a fresca, I believe, shows several warriors, with one carrying this on a pole. However, another warrior is wearing a tunic of a very similar design, and yellow belts are also worn. It is not a flag, but a tunic with a cutout for the neck, and a belt, hanging from a spear. This file mistakenly misinterprets it as a modern flag, non-existent at the time period.


https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2016-01/1452840218_1.-samnite_soldiers_from_a_tomb_frieze_in_nola_4th_century_bce.jpg Dughorm (talk) 00:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Procedural  Keep as this is currently in use on cswiki, but I support deletion if that gets ironed out. Not only is unclear whether this frieze depicts a flag at all, but even if it is a flag there's no obvious reason to suspect that it represented the Samnite people as a whole. Omphalographer (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ida Lupino signature.svg[edit]

Per COM:SIG UK, subject died in 1995 so not old enough to be in PD A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: As discussed here and here, COM:SIG UK misstates the relevant law and the cited sources, and the user who wrote it no longer stands by it. A1Cafel appears to have nominated a handful of signatures for deletion on this incorrect basis. He has been pinged several times about this issue. In light of the above, it would seem appropriate for him to weigh in as to whether he believes the nominations are still appropriate. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Phil Collins' Autograph.JPG[edit]

Per COM:SIG UK A1Cafel (talk) 03:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, which one of the named reasons does hit here? KR, Wikisympathisant (talk) 04:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So a photograph that I took of an autograph that I was sent should be deleted? Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
unfortunately, but Cafel did not write exact reason until now. May be, it can be possible to put a hint on the file ... KR, Wikisympathisant (talk) 12:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment: As discussed here and here, COM:SIG UK misstates the relevant law and the cited sources, and the user who wrote it no longer stands by it. A1Cafel appears to have nominated a handful of signatures for deletion on this incorrect basis. He has been pinged several times about this issue. In light of the above, it would seem appropriate for him to weigh in as to whether he believes the nominations are still appropriate. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you for your remarks and the hint Wikisympathisant (talk) 08:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Phil Collins Signature.svg[edit]

Per COM:SIG UK A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: As discussed here and here, COM:SIG UK misstates the relevant law and the cited sources, and the user who wrote it no longer stands by it. A1Cafel appears to have nominated a handful of signatures for deletion on this incorrect basis. He has been pinged several times about this issue. In light of the above, it would seem appropriate for him to weigh in as to whether he believes the nominations are still appropriate. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Taio Cruz.jpg[edit]

Per COM:SIG UK A1Cafel (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: As discussed here and here, COM:SIG UK misstates the relevant law and the cited sources, and the user who wrote it no longer stands by it. A1Cafel appears to have nominated a handful of signatures for deletion on this incorrect basis. He has been pinged several times about this issue. In light of the above, it would seem appropriate for him to weigh in as to whether he believes the nominations are still appropriate. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Signature of Chen Shui-bian.png[edit]

Per COM:SIG Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Signature of Chen Shui-bian.svg[edit]

Per COM:SIG Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Marcus Chang Signature.svg[edit]

Per COM:SIG Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


When I uploaded this file, I questioned about the issue in the Help Desk, which you can find at here. Anverleo (talk) 09:25, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Flakestate Holding Pinecone.jpg[edit]

Possible F10 CoffeeEngineer (talk) 04:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Leake Street. - 52978111247.jpg[edit]

No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 04:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:55 Sine wave.ogg[edit]

File content is wrong; it’s 164.8 Hz. Stephan Leeds (talk) 05:31, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1944-DERROCADO-MAXIMILIANO-HERNANDEZ.jpg[edit]

no proof of PD PizzaKing13 (talk) 06:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Puente cuscatlan.jpg[edit]

no proof of PD PizzaKing13 (talk) 06:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Reporte de niños desaparecidos elaborada por la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de El Salvador durante la guerra civil. Dicho reporte es una de las principales fuentes de consulta en la investigación de hechos de la guerra salvadoreña.jpg[edit]

not an own work, no proof of PD PizzaKing13 (talk) 06:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC) 40-some uploads, all seem to be personal photos, and no global contributions; F10 probably applies. Gnomingstuff (talk) 07:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:2012 stamps of Colombia[edit]

These images were originally uploaded to Flickr by the Colombian national police under a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. The problem is that according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Colombia stamps from the country are copyrighted for at least 70 years after the publication date. The same term also seems to apply to government works. So it's pretty unlikely these images are free of copyright. Otherwise there should really be better evidence then the images being uploaded to Flickr as cc-by-sa-2.0.

Adamant1 (talk) 10:04, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Delete Agreed. As these are 2012 stamps, they are too new to have had their copyright expire in Colombia. They also have a 95 year USA copyright per URAA at Commons:Hirtle_chart, making this PD in 2108. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:C E M Joad 1945 by Griff.jpg[edit]

1945 work published anonymously in the UK. Did this get URAA'd? In other words, was it in the public domain in the UK by 1996? Therefore, do we have any reason to assume it's PD in the US? PseudoSkull (talk) 13:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Comment According to research done by Marnanel (via Discord), "Griff", the pseudonymous author, is a T. H. Griffiths, a British cartoonist. A relevant book entry for Grin with Griff: Over 150 Cartoons. A death date was not ascertained at this time. PseudoSkull (talk) 17:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aver portrait.jpg[edit]

Оригинал фотографии никак не мог быть сделан в 2019 году, поскольку изображённая на ней персона умерла в 2008 году Jim Hokins (talk) 15:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Безусловно - это скан семейного фото, сделанного на пленочную камеру где в 1960х KunRiskun (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Будьте добры, снимите номинацию - как еще скан фотокарточки можно вписать в автоматическую систему загрузки..? KunRiskun (talk) 17:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David James Nielson Planning Photo.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Jimfbleak as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: another fake own work, also ovbviously not PD, the incident was in WWII

Possibly public domain if published. We'd need to know more about the photograph though. Converting to DR for discussion. Abzeronow (talk) 15:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Abzeronow, could you please let me know what information you need about the photograph? Thanks Kai110ux (talk) 14:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kai110ux: Do you know who the photographer was or when this was published or where it was first published? Abzeronow (talk) 17:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know who the photographer was, I just found this photo, along with the other photos, in my great-grandfather's photo album and scenned them to my computer. I don't believe it is published online, and if it is then I can't find it for love nor money. Kai110ux (talk) 17:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks. As an unpublished photograph of unknown authorship created in 1943 or 1944, this cannot be hosted on Commons until 2065. It would be possible to upload this locally to English Wikipedia as a fair use file under the guidelines at w:Wikipedia:Non-free content, I believe. Abzeronow (talk) 18:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David James Nielson Military Portrait.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Jimfbleak as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: another WWII "PD" claim

Published 1940s photograph. Could be public domain but we'd need to verify that. Converting to DR for discussion. Abzeronow (talk) 15:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey there Abzeronow, I believe this file should be in the public domain as the Crown Copyright on it has now expired, since they only last 50 years, and since it is clearly a photo taken by a member of the armed forces for the armed forces. Thanks Kai110ux (talk) 14:00, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe Crown copyright for this photograph would be plausible. Abzeronow (talk) 17:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By that you mean you think the copyright still holds? Or that you believe it is now public domain? Kai110ux (talk) 09:52, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would be public domain now if it were Crown copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 00:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Antoniuskapelle (Hochmössingen)[edit]

copyright violation; painter died in 1977; no freedom of panorama.

Martin Sg. (talk) 15:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo, offenbar setzt die Löschbegeisterung vor Weihnachten richtig ein. Seit drei Jahren sind die Fotos in den Commons und keiner hatte Bedenken. Da ist zum Beispiel das Foto einer Statue des hl. Antonius, vermutlich eine Gipsfigur, die es in zig oder hunderten Exemplaren gibt. Bei den Gemälden kann man bezüglich Schöpfungshöhe unterschiedlicher Meinung sein. Hier sollte zunächst die Fotografin angesprochen werden, um von den Hinterbliebenen des Malers oder eines eventuellen anderen Rechteinhabers die Bildfreigabe einzuholen, statt hier gleich den Löschantrag reinzuhauen. Auch der Löschantragsteller könnte helfen, die Freigabe zu erlangen. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo, zur Freigabe könnte man sich vielleicht an die Stadt Oberndorf am Neckar wenden. Dürfte wegen der Feiertage aber länger dauern. Gruß --Georgfotoart (talk) 18:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Arabic Wikipedia Logo Gaza (3).svg[edit]

Potential violation of the WMF trademark policy. GPSLeo (talk) 16:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Section 2.1: "On the Wikimedia sites, you may use the marks in any form. You may create remixes of the wordmarks and logos, abbreviate them, and add to them." Pyb en résidence (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes but it could fall under 5.3 Misrepresentation. "When you use a Wikimedia mark under this policy, please use it to represent only the project for which it stands. Please do not create the impression that your use is in any way endorsed, sponsored by, or is part of the Wikimedia Foundation." Especially in combination with the current description: "The Arabic Wikipedia logo and a Palestinian scarf in mourning for the martyrs of Gaza". GPSLeo (talk) 18:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
GPSLeo, How is the above logo different from other logo variants? This logo only used to represent only the project for which it stands (2023 Arabic Wikipedia protest), and can you explain what impression did you get? Regarding the current description, perhaps the colleague made a mistake, and the "in mourning for the martyrs of Gaza" part should be removed. --Alaa :)..! 19:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found only one other variant with a plain national flag. And none of the past Wikipedia protests ever used an adapted logo. GPSLeo (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ukrainian Wikipedia used a "logo to support Ukraine against Russia invasion 2022". Is this not the same? Generousjj (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. The sole purpose of the logo is to be used in a manipulative manner as a part of an ar-wiki banner making false statements on intentional targeting of schools and hospitals and other unsubstantiated statements ignoring HAMAS attrocities and its policy of using the civil population for its terrorist purposes. Such use is in blatant violation of NPOV, which is the fundamental principle of Wikimedia projects, and Wikmedia marks should not be used to make deceptive and biased political statements. It is perfectly fine to express support of the civilians affected by a military conflict, but not in such biased manner. -- Prokurator11 (talk) 06:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How are any of these points relevant in any way to the discussion? Freedom4U (talk) 12:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's a POV that you defend, but you can't oppose that Arabic WP takes bond with people in Gaza and Palestine. And in Hebrew WP, also exits. Anas1712 (talk) 20:53, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The fact that Hamas committed atrocities can not in any way justify the horrible crimes Israel is now committing during this genocidal war. You cannot delate more than 21.000 civilian deaths, 40% children. You cannot delate the Palestinian people with your hasbara censorship. And you cannot delate the fact that Netanyahu government knew about the planning of the Hamas terrorist attack a year in advance and it did nothing to prevent it: the Israeli army was in the West Bank to oppress Palestinians along with the illegal settlers, no one Israeli soldier was defending the anarmed israeli people along the border with Gaza 2A01:827:826:3E01:E9E5:76AE:2FA9:1AC1 00:46, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep. I see no violation of policy, no biased statement, not even an allusion to any political side. Objectively speaking, it is a logo mixing Wikipedia logo + Palestinian flag + Palestinian scarf (other similar examples do exist and were accepted and even celebrated) in memory of the nearly 100,000 people killed and injured. 193.227.175.123 09:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep There is no violation of the policy. Many logo variants are made and there is no fundamental difference with the Arabic logo. Ahmed Naji Talk 12:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep. Must be possible for a project to support a cause, like with the anti-SOPA/PIPA protests. --Anas1712 (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't see any difference with File:Wiki_advertisement3.JPG. --TadejM (t/p) 12:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is a collage of multiple files the logo itself is not changed. But as I already wrote if we would decide to delete here we also need to have a look at other versions. GPSLeo (talk) 13:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In my opinion, this nicely fits the claim 'On the Wikimedia sites, you may use the marks in any form.' I don't see any 'impression that your use is in any way endorsed, sponsored by, or is part of the Wikimedia Foundation.' that would stem from the image itself. Its description and usage on the Arabic Wikipedia may be contested, but this is a separate issue that does not require us to delete the image. --TadejM (t/p) 17:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete, This flag has been a subject of controversy (Invented in 1964). it represents Palestinians as well as indirectly endorses actions considered extreme or inhumane, such as the use of civilian spaces for military purposes. Rojeh1995 (talk) 09:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This flag represents the State of Palestine, and is not contested. Why are you conflating "represent[ing] Palestinians" with "endors[ing] actions considered extreme or inhumane"? Those are completely different things, and the use of this flag in no way supports inhumane actions, or a specific entity like Hamas. Generousjj (talk) 08:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David James Nielson Training Photo 1.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Jimfbleak as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Date is at least 1930, obviously not PD

Possibly public domain in the EU, but we'd need to know more information about the photograph. Converting to DR for discussion. Abzeronow (talk) 17:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.

Estopedist1 (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kris Jenner in Badgley Mischka.jpg[edit]

flickr washing - bogus license on Flickr doesn't match copyright notice "Photo by Jennifer Graylock/Getty Images for Heart Truth Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that all the images at Category:The Heart Truth 2013 have this issue. Other than an assertion that they are public domain and licensed that way on Flickr, the actual exif data on the images conflict with the details of the license. These are Getty Images sourced and photos were not taken by employees of the federal government as stated. Note the license states "Please ensure that this image was actually created by the US Federal government. The NIH frequently uses commercial images which are not public domain" That appears to be the case here, these are not public domain images. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Portugal Hammerskins.svg[edit]

Possible copyvio: Logo from a political group from Portugal CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it isnt copyrighted as the political group isnt legal in Portugal due to their beliefs Cpmtiago (talk) 20:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem here is that, even if the group is illegal, there is an author for this picture. I am not aware of the law about logos in Portugal, but I doubt it falls automatically in public domain, even for an illegal group. Also, are you the creator of this logo, as you claim on the page? If yes, please follow the instruction on this page: [1]. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
from what I read, in Portugal, in order for a logo to be copyrighted the author must register the logo. in this specific case, as the logo isnt registered, the logo can be used freely. if you have other interpretation of the situation let me know. greetings! Cpmtiago (talk) 22:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not knowledgeable about logos from Portugal. I will let an admin decide. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Peru-Bolivian United States[edit]

Fictional flags / CoA for a country that never came to exist, only one official flag is known that remains on Wikipedia. Apart from being very low quality images.

 Goldsztern  ✶  19:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Album representantů všech oborů veřejného života československého - 1927 - Martin Benka.png[edit]

The proper license is unknown, and it was marked for speedy deletion. I hate to delete a perfectly good file in use on several Wikipedias that's clearly good under US law and probably good under Czech law if someone wants to find the correct details. Prosfilaes (talk) 20:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there! Sorry - licence corrected! 2A02:8308:207:5E00:2C0D:648D:B697:E7DC 22:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Josetti JUNO Klebemarken.jpg[edit]

These ca. 1910s German advertising stamps are signed by artist Kon Linon. Kon Linon was the pseudonym used for a long time by graphic artist Walter (Konrad) Linon from Berlin. I couldn't find dates of birth or death for him, but I could find him in the Berlin phone and address books from 1923 to 1966. So it is pretty clear that the died less than 70 years ago, and his works are still protected in Germany, so the file should be deleted. The works here are dated to ca. 1910, I could find a ca. 1912 date for one of them in the web somewhere. Since we don't know Linon's year of death, the file can be restored with {{PD-old-assumed}} (at least 120 years after creation/publication, but not earlier than 70 years after the last year we have a record of the artist) in 2037. Rosenzweig τ 21:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2023/12/23&oldid=849707189"