Commons:Deletion requests/2024/05/20

19 May 2024

21 May 2024

Deletion requests on 20 May 2024

May 20

File:Forks of Credit Provincial Park，Canada (53267092933).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the uploader. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forks of credit Provincial Park，Canada (53286777543).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:HK 北區 North District 粉嶺 Fanling 百和路 Park Wo Road 粉嶺公路 Fanling Highway Chinese temple 蓬瀛仙館 Fung Ying Sen Koon opening hours sign May 2024 R12S 12.jpg

No Freedom of panorama of Text in Hong Kong SAR. メイド理世 (talk) 01:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forks of the credit Provincial Park，Ontario， Canada (53265096112).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Image passed now as {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}} per Geo Swan Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Francisco (53303360655).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Late afternoon at Mesquite，Cororado (53523595266).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Landscape (53298844182).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hong Kong (53483607541).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Image passed now by the flickrbot on a {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}} license. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Half moon bay California (53524393734).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 01:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fall color (53286612694).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chicago Sears tower (53299083519).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:錫安國家公園(Zion National Park)，Utah (53524433595).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tour evening Chicago (53333224197).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Talking rock，Antelope Canyon (53517974957).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snowing at Bryce Canyon National Park (53514500549).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Smiling Joe，下鈴羊峽谷 (53519677500).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 02:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍崗 Longgang 北門街 Beimen Street 龍城麗佳百貨 Longcheng Lijia Department Store 平園路 Pingyuan Road August 2023 Px3 11.jpg

COM:TOYS メイド理世 (talk) 03:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍崗 Longgang 龍崗大道 Longgang Avenue 星都里商場 Xing Too Li Shopping Mall rules October 2023 R12S.jpg

No Freedom of panorama of Text in China. メイド理世 (talk) 03:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roadside Attractions.png

Copyrighted logo of film distribution company. Exceeds COM:TOO IagoQnsi (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Emblems and Flags of Palestinian Political Parties

The files listed above could potentially violate copyright as they are representations of the emblems of the political parties, which may be protected by copyright under Palestinian law. This still applies even if they are represented in a different style, but still convey the same meaning. There is no indication that the emblems are under public domain in the country. Also see Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Hamas and the non-free symbol template on Wikipedia. --Bambobee (talk) 05:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the Hamas ones but since the PLO/Fatah are considered the legitimate government of Palestine it's in public domain (in Palestine at least), read this PD template:

The work or image is in the public domain because the copyright term expired in the State of Palestine (Details). According to the Copyright Ordinance of 1924 where the Palestinian Copyright Act of 1911 applies too, the Arab Copyright Treaty of 1981, and the "Basic Law" of governmental Palestine which uses the old acts, all occupied territories of Palestine use Israeli copyright laws so it is also included, it states:

The copyright of anonymous and pseudonymous works shall be protected for 70 years after the date of their publication
It is a statute, regulation, Knesset protocol or court decision and therefore ineligible for copyright protection according to §6 of the Israel's copyright statute from 2007 (translation)

To uploader: Please provide where the image was first published and who created it.

You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that this work might not be in the public domain in countries that do not apply the rule of the shorter term and have copyright terms longer than life of the author plus 50 years. In particular, Mexico is 100 years, Jamaica is 95 years, Colombia is 80 years, Guatemala and Samoa are 75 years, Switzerland and the United States are 70 years, and Venezuela is 60 years.

State of Palestine

RowanJ LP (talk) 00:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Fatah is a government organization recognized by the Palestinian government, while Hamas and PIJ are not recognized by the government, so the flags, emblems and logos used by the latter two are likely to be protected by Palestinian copyright law, although their copyright is in a "de facto seizure state". The Fatah logo can be retained, while the Hamas and PIJ logos should be removed and re-uploaded on other Wikimedia projects under fair use. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 23:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with symbols, flags of Fatah. Per @Fumikas Sagisavas, Fatah is a Palestinian governmental organization, and led by Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas. There isn't proof that fair use is OK, so all files related to Fatah's symbols, flags and emblems should be kept under public domain. while others have copyrights seized under de facto. Kys5g^talk! 12:56, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In heraldry the flag designs are mostly not copyrighted, but specific files depicting COAs might be, with the artist who created the file being the copyright owner. Most files in the above set, are SVG files claiming to be created by the uploaders. If that is true, than unless someone can show that the concept of given emblem or flag is copyrighted, than I think those are fine. Now if individual files, were copied from elsewhere or we have a reason to believe that the uploader did not created them than those individual files should be nominated. --Jarekt (talk) 23:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep peer nomination AbchyZa22 (talk) 21:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo quran kareem.png

it's not good to apply rainbow colors to the name of the holy quran 41.235.181.76 11:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:UlicaKsięciaJózefa-1944-Kraków.jpg

Copied from fotopolska.eu without providing the direct link to the original. Thus, the license and the author of the original are unknown. Moreover, it is doubtful if this is indeed Księcia Józefa street. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 11:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ALAS PILIPINAS logo.png

Don't think the logo satisfy COM:THRESHOLD particularly the logo mark (gold triangle) Hariboneagle927 (talk) 12:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stanford university campus after a rain and strong wind (53642791287).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung (53635526810).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung (53622402082).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung (53623344423).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung (53618390039).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung (53618347305).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Watch tower (53612753010).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Watch tower in Korea (53608284056).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Library (53608036346).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Library in Seoul (53608020746).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مطار الشلف-أبو بكر بلقايد الدولي.jpg

Copyright violation 2A01:CB08:ADB:E00:8484:44B9:9F2D:20C1 14:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tineye finds zero matches. Geo Swan (talk) 14:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مسابقة الأغنية الأوروبية 1980.png

COM:TOO Switzerland John123521 (talk) 14:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zion National Park，Utah (53534446434).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Half Moon Bay California (53526477719).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chicago City covered by the October late afternoon sunshine (53575120090).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Image passed on a {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}} license. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chicago Grand Park (53587806388).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Larry Graham and Zac Celinder with Celinder Bass by Christian (Chris) Celinder.png

Unclear if the Flickr user actually owns the image. https://www.flickr.com/photos/200608747@N02/53700834708/ shows a phone screenshot, not an original photograph. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According til User:Saksak the license is genuine. I myself have no opinion. -Pugilist (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The license is genuine but the image is a derivative work. --Leoboudv (talk) 08:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:水源市古蹟 (53607588791).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Horseshose bend (53723743224).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:TV tower Seoul (53673395878).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The tower is modern and fails COM:FOP SK--A1Cafel (talk) 03:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's N Seoul Tower. Ox1997cow (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:경복궁／景福宮 Gyeongbokgung，Seoul (53657745557).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Geo Swan as no license because there is a robot out there that thinks it is authorized to over-ride my informed human judgement. I explicitly added a {{PDMark-owner}}. The {{PDMark-owner}} I added means that, IMO, this flickr user is one of those who thinks they should use the public domain mark to mark their own images as public domain. They tagged ALL their images with a public domain mark. There is no indication that ANY of them were not their own work.

In my opinion no robot should over-ride an informed human judgement. Geo Swan (talk) 14:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Susita Diosa.jpg

Not freely licensed Brunnaiz (talk) 15:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lattakia -photo by the * Phoenician bird.jpg

too blurry to be a useful image of Syria Krok6kola (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wikipedia-VideoWiki-Barack Obama video article.webm

Is a machine-made reading of a Wikipedia article really useful? Trade (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Viktoria Pier-Marie

Non-notable person, out of scope.

Quick1984 (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a Russian jazz singer who got some media coverage (e.g. in the renowned weekly newspaper Argumenty i Fakty [1] and others [2][3]) and is the sister of the musician Pierre Narcisse. Nakonana (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohalla Sabha - Kalkaji, New Delhi.jpg

This image should be speedily deleted as the person in this image is no more with the political party and has requested to remove images displaying him from Wikimedia commons. Failure to this would cause a legal issue for us. Hence please delete. AAPPilibhit (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gaurav Katiyar.jpg

This image should be speedily deleted as the person in this image is no more with the political party and has requested to remove images displaying him from Wikimedia commons. Failure to this would cause a legal issue for us. Hence please delete. AAPPilibhit (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aam Aadmi Party - Pilibhit Unit.jpg

This image should be speedily deleted as the person in this image is no more with the political party and has requested to remove images displaying him from Wikimedia commons. Failure to this would cause a legal issue for us. Hence please delete. AAPPilibhit (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aam Aadmi Party - Kalkaji unit.jpg

This image should be speedily deleted as the person in this image is no more with the political party and has requested to remove images displaying him from Wikimedia commons. Failure to this would cause a legal issue for us. Hence please delete. AAPPilibhit (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aam Aadmi Party - Baheri Unit.jpg

This image should be speedily deleted as the person in this image is no more with the political party and has requested to remove images displaying him from Wikimedia commons. Failure to this would cause a legal issue for us. Hence please delete. AAPPilibhit (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sophie Khachatryan.jpg

because I made it when I was younger and I want it to be completely deleted, I dont want my picture or name be here Sophie.khachatryan (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

because I made it when I was younger and I want it to be completely deleted, I dont want my picture or name be here Sophie.khachatryan (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sacaste la foto de tu Facebook también? No sé porqué no la han borrado antes... 191.125.21.194 23:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bôa circa 1994 line up.jpg

The file was uploaded under as "Own work" under the CC0 license. Searching for the image with Google Lens is possible to find the image on Jasmine Rodgers website (https://jasminerodgers.com/photos), where it is credit to Adrian Boot. Adrian Boot is a famous british music photographer who licenses his work for commercial use through his company Urban Image (https://www.urbanimage.tv). Therefore, it seems unlikely he would upload this image under CC0 license. Beyond that, the uploader account, ArchRchive, is a new account which only contribution to the Wikimedia project was the upload of this image. Pfcab (talk) 16:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:А. Н. Арбузов. Таня. Аудиоспектакль, 1939.ogg

Bogus license claim: playwright Arbuzov died in 1986, director Lobanov - in 1959, female lead Babanova - in 1983. Quick1984 (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Playwright have copyrights. Director and actors have no copyrights, but have neighbouring rights, which are protected lifetime or (not plus) 50(54) years after recording (choose the longest protection period). Alex Spade (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Славяне в V-VI веках.png

The map does not refer to reliable sources. The Polyans and the Antes did not live at the same time. Other communities are also given anachronistically. Nikolay Omonov (talk) 17:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Weighing Carbon Dioxide Absorbers for Large Respiration Calorimeter - NARA - 5729289 (page 2).jpg

Duplicate of File:Weighing Carbon Dioxide Absorbers for Large Respiration Calorimeter - NARA - 5729289 (page 1).jpg TheImaCow (talk) 17:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pie Judging Contest with Dr. Louise Stanley and Mary Lindsay - NARA - 5729294 (page 2).jpg

duplicate of File:Pie Judging Contest with Dr. Louise Stanley and Mary Lindsay - NARA - 5729294 (page 1).jpg TheImaCow (talk) 17:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Transamericafm (talk · contribs)

Football logos without any context/categories/description, many are low quality and above TOO, likely none are own work as claimed.

TheImaCow (talk) 18:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taiwan protester at Legislative Yuan.jpg

拍攝者提到自己拍攝的新聞類照片均採CC BY-SA-NC 4.0--KOKUYO (talk) 18:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

我當日有向拍攝者徵詢同意，而他也於昨日向官方寄送授權信 Kanshui0943 (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

現在的問題是這張照片授權有NC，但你的上傳條款不合。-- Subscriptshoe9 (talk) 08:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

但是作者另外再給官方授權也不行嗎 Kanshui0943 (talk) 02:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

在提供授權後，會有VRT志工審查並儲存在許可檔案中，但到目前都沒有。在遲遲沒有授權的情況下，這張照片就應當被視為違反著作權，而應該刪除。 KOKUYO (talk) 06:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

請儘快確認著作權，並投遞至VRT隊列，以便志工審核。—— Eric Liu_（Talk） 20:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Самуил Львович Ратнер.jpg

Random date of creation, missing date of publication. Bogus license tag - pma 70 for an unknown author. Quick1984 (talk) 18:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Самуил Львович Ратнер был выдающимся дирижером и педагогом, воспитавшим плеяду советских дирижеров. Он был главным дирижером ряда оркестров в России и Белоруссии. Его имя надо сохранять для истории. Arak (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photos from '74. The photo was published in open sources. The photograph is available in the archives of the Axionova family, who studied with Ratner. The family of Ratner and Axionova have no claims. Григор Вар (talk) 15:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Licensing. Quick1984 (talk) 16:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eni logo 2023.svg

Already deleted (Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Logo_ENI_nuovo.svg) InterComMan (talk) 18:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:NS11 Sembawang Mrt station 20240520.jpg

Because it is Logo Jyncarecat (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sandrine Lefebvre-Reghay photo.png

Ce fichier me représente dans un cadre privé et je n'ai pas donné l'autorisation pour sa publication sur Internet. Slr3105 (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Est-ce que vous plaisantez? Vous l'avez chargé vous-même il y a 11 ans. --Achim55 (talk) 20:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Que rico escuchar frances con acento aleman, achtung! 191.125.21.194 21:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rodolfo Carter en 2023.jpg

No clear origin of the photo Rodm23 (talk) 21:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1910 M Legagneux 102187.jpg

I cannot find a death date for "Phototypie J. Bienaimé Reims", name possibly being Jean Bienaimé. 1910 postcard is too young for PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 21:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, je suis bien content que vous attribuiez cette carte postale à "Phototypie J. Bienaimé Reims". Quelle est votre source ? Sur l'image ? Cordialement Gérald Garitan (talk) 06:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oui, sur l'image, dans le coin inférieur gauche. Abzeronow (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Une carte postale publié en France en 1910, trop jeune ? Une autre licence ou sous droit ? Merci

Yes, too young for our guidelines when there is a named author. File:1910 M Labouchère sur Antoinette 102187.jpg may be by the same photographer. Was definitely published in Reims. Abzeronow (talk) 23:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:JNG(For Mock Elections).webp

Not in the public domain HistorianL (talk) 22:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kokoa Egypt.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Leyo as no source (No source since) Sandra Hanbo (talk) 22:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the file, adding the picture date to be before 1979 (time of death of this actress, thus her pictures are now in the Public domain).

Files in Category:Museu do Colono Collection

Sorry, possible VDA, because the wrong metadata table were used by the new assistant during the trainning activity.

SSoster (WMB) (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ligue 1 2024.jpg

duplicate of File:Logo Ligue 1 2024.jpg H4stings (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ligue-1-2024.jpg

unused duplicate of File:Logo Ligue 1 2024.jpg H4stings (talk) 22:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ChadcoTF.png

Joke, Out of Scope, The parts put together are from unidentified sources CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eri gay.jpg

Possible copyvio: Already in 2022 on the Internet according to TinEye, Ghost from Call of Duty CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y si no fuera copyvio qué? Cuál es el "scope"? 191.125.21.194 23:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

¿Tiene derecho a publicar esta imagen? ¿Es usted el creador? Si es así, ¿podría rellenar este formulario? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator CoffeeEngineer (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:9 High Street Congleton Cheshire.jpg

File contains copyrighted images:the men in the balloon and the men in the football shirts. Should have known those would be copyrightable. Maurice Oly (talk) 23:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maurice Oly: Those could be blurred so we don't have to delete the whole photograph. --Rosenzweig τ 09:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please blur it, as its impossible to get a photo of the building as of now without the copyrighted artwork in the photo. Maurice Oly (talk) 11:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep De minimis. -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Herb. You're my favorite admin. Keep the file and the good work. 191.125.175.228 23:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm not an admin! -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 09:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:7 High Street Congleton, February 2024.jpg

File contains copyrighted image:the men in the balloon. Should have known that would be copyrightable. Maurice Oly (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maurice Oly: That could be blurred so we don't have to delete the whole photograph. --Rosenzweig τ 09:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please blur it, as I would rather we not have to delete the photo. Maurice Oly (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep De minimis. Why would there even be a reason to blur that tiny detail?-- Herbert Ortner (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is Herb the only reasonable person in this useless discussion? Keep. 191.125.175.228 23:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lets not insult people shall we. I was just concerned about copyrighted artwork was all. I feel it was reasonable to request blurring before the artwork was pointed out to be De Minimis. Maurice Oly (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My reason for asking for it to be blured was simple, its artwork and there is no proof the creator has been dead for 75 years.

I'm relived its De Minimis. Maurice Oly (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grade II Congleton Chronicle office.jpg

File contains copyrighted image:the two nutcrackers. As burly as the artwork is I feel it might be an issue Maurice Oly (talk) 23:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maurice Oly: You mean the poster on the grey door on the right? That could be blurred so we don't have to delete the whole photograph. --Rosenzweig τ 09:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the poster on the grey door is what I mean. I should have been clearer on that.
I did not know we could blur it, but if we could that would be great. Maurice Oly (talk) 11:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep De minimis. -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Herb. Stop exaggerating. 191.125.175.228 23:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:IMKHA.jpg

2022 artwork still protected by copyright--see statement at artist's website at [4] DanielPenfield (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roslyn Mould, Ghanaian Humanist.jpg

Reasons for deletion request The one who is in the photograph has expressed dissatisfaction with her image and likeness being represented this way. The owner claims the image does not represent how she looks. copyvio -Owula kpakpo (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/2024/05/20

May 20

Files in Category:Emblems and Flags of Palestinian Political Parties

Files in Category:Viktoria Pier-Marie

Files uploaded by Transamericafm (talk · contribs)

Files in Category:Museu do Colono Collection

Navigation menu

Search