Commons:Deletion requests/2024/11/11

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
10 November 2024
12 November 2024
Deletion requests on 11 November 2024

November 11

[edit]

File:Bartosz Brenes.jpg

[edit]

Doubtful own work claim. No EXIF data and larger-crop images exist online at popmuzik.se/79331/barzo-paradise-feat-debi-nova-video/, ra.co/events/1214044, seetickets.us/event/FreeFall-Barzo-DJ-Set-DJ-Synapse-and-DJ-INRVISN/379364 Rubýñ (Scold) 03:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep, not evidence of copyvio. TinEye didn't turn anything up. All links are from after original upload date. Dmartin969 (talk) 06:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joshua- WIKIPEDIA.jpg

[edit]

The newspaper cover that the person is carrying is copyrighted media, I think this photograph could have problems so I leave it to the discretion of whether it is a derivative work. Taichi (talk) 05:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The text seems really too small to read, except for the headline, and I don't see how the phrase "informacion offline a bajo costa" could be copyrightable. So I think the derivative work aspect would be PD-de minimis. I'm confused about the small size of the photo, but there are no dupes in either TinEye or Google Images, so it's probably right to keep the file for now, even though I have suspicions about its provenance and the uploader has some deletions to their (dis)credit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep, newspaper is De minimis, and is not main focus of image. Dmartin969 (talk) 06:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Convair 580 turbo prop airplane.gif

[edit]

Permission for this not-own-work upload is not sufficient. Statement by uploader "He has given me permission to use this picture in publications about Girard B. Henderson." clearly does not equal the claimed CC-BY license. In addition, uploader has now removed the author-name and changed to unknown. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. Copyright violation. Uploader's claim of CC-BY-SA is contradictory to the permission they were given from the photo's owner. Graywalls (talk) 14:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The protraph was taken in 1 January 1970. It is part of the Henderson Family Collection and was never published. I am using the cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs licence. The person that provided the photo is dead as well as the subjects in the picture. Greg Henderson (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If someone took a picture of your grandparents next to one of the kind background and that picture ends up in your family album, the mere fact your grandparents appear in the photo doesn't give you full reign to release the photo as public domain. That's not how CC-BY-SA-heirs work. You own a copy of the photo, but you don't own the copyright. Graywalls (talk) 05:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 廣州 Guangzhou 天河區 Tianhe Aoti South Road 優托邦 UTOPA Hub Mall XR Park car roadshow November 2024 R12S 03.jpg

[edit]

No FoP in China for 2D posters 茅野ふたば (talk) 10:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep apperars to be very generic {{PD-text}} ~TheImaCow (talk) 21:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{{PD-text}} not apply for the posters, see: COM:FOP China 茅野ふたば (talk) 02:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:HK STT 石塘咀 Shek Tong Tsui 德輔道西 Des Voeux Road West shop 越潮正宗越南食店 Viet Namese Restaurnat menu March 2023 Px3.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted food menus in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 11:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:HK SKD 寶琳 Po Lam 新都城中心 Metro City Plaza MCP Three mall shop 惠康超級市場 Wellcome Supermarket goods March 2023 Px3 11.jpg

[edit]

COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 11:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:VirtualBox Guest Additions (2009-2010).svg

[edit]

This SVG image is raster, not vector, and it is duplicate of PNG version. Xeverything11 (talk) 14:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:VirtualBox Guest Additions (2010).svg

[edit]

This SVG image is raster, not vector, and it is duplicate of PNG version. Xeverything11 (talk) 15:00, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Assault Lily logo.png

[edit]

This is not simple text logo, it not apply as {{PD-text}}, likely above threshold of originality. 茅野ふたば (talk) 15:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Sveriges civilförsvarsförbunds förtjänstmedalj.png

[edit]

Does not match the original color of the ribbon bar. There is also an svg variant (File:Sveriges Civilförsvarsförbunds förtjänstmedalj.svg) that better represents the ribbon bar. I am the original uploader of this file. Saftgurka (talk) 15:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[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:Oil India Logo.svg

[edit]

The logo does not correspond to the source link. The link contains the old logo, which was recently updated in August 2023, and can be found here. The image is unrelated to Oil India, potentially causing confusion and spreading misinformation.- AjayDas (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: It looks like the correct logo, it's PD-textlogo, and it's heavily in use. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: It doesn't appear to be the correct old logo as it's missing two main details: the line below the words 'Oil India Limited' and the inclusion of 'A Government of India Enterprise' written in both English and Hindi. This differs from the source indicating the original old logo, which doesn't match this logo. Furthermore, Oil India has recently changed its logo, so the new logo should be used instead of this confusing one.AjayDas (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oil India Logo.svg

[edit]

It doesn't appear to be the correct old logo as it's missing two main details: the line below the words 'Oil India Limited' and the inclusion of 'A Government of India Enterprise' written in both English and Hindi. This differs from the source indicating the original old logo, which doesn't match this logo. Furthermore, Oil India has recently changed its logo, so the new logo should be used instead of this confusing one. original logo can be found here AjayDas (talk) 15:41, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:INUSE. If the new logo hasn't already been uploaded and it's within COM:TOO India, it should be uploaded, but the old logo shouldn't be deleted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: The logo in question is not the original old logo of Oil India Limited. In fact, it has never been the official logo of OIL in its entire history. Therefore, it is incorrect to claim it as the official logo of Oil India. This logo appears to be a derivative of the old logo, not the original. I have no objection to using the original old logo, but I strongly object to using this derivative version. AjayDas (talk) 10:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep. Not a valid reason to delete. The file is used and as said by Ikan above, the new logo should be uploaded as a new file if it's below COM:TOO India. I see you've uploaded the new logo to enwiki here. It also seems to be {{PD-textlogo}} as well as below TOO India and can be uploaded here. Any thoughts, Ikan Kekek? --Ratekreel (talk) 04:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None except to agree with you and thank User:AjayDas for uploading the current logo. AjayDas, if you want to replace the thumbnail used in Wikipedia articles, go ahead and do that, but that doesn't involve Commons and certainly doesn't involve deletion here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will upload the current logo here. However, I strongly believe it's incorrect to keep the self-proclaimed derivative logo as an official one. The uploader failed to mention that it's a derivative work. If you still consider keeping it, I suggest renaming it as a derivative work to maintain accuracy. Failing to do so will spread misinformation. The original old logo can be found here AjayDas (talk) 11:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can edit the file description, you know. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't get to make decisions about keeping or deleting files. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The uploader has uploaded the file from a now-dead webpage (archived here) which has same logo as is on the document that you've provided. I would still not prefer to delete this one. The file name can be renamed and can be kept under a different name. Meanwhile, new logo can also be uploaded. Ratekreel (talk) 11:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I would like to highlight that the link provided by the uploader contains the original old logo. However, the image he uploaded does not match the source link. It lacks some vital details, such as "A Government of India Enterprise" written in both Hindi and English below the company name, and a black line. Both elements are essential parts of the logo. The uploader has uploaded a derivative image where both details are missing. Claiming it to be the logo of the company is not correct. It should be renamed and the description changed, if not considered for deletion. AjayDas (talk) 18:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you edit the file description and request COM:File renaming if you want that? Do you understand that wikis operate on the efforts of volunteers? No-one is paid to do the things you want them to do. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The incorrect logo, uploaded long ago, has been widely used by many individuals and third-party websites, potentially harming the company's reputation. Renaming alone may not suffice. However, through this discussion, I now consider keeping the file with renaming as an alternative.
As a contributor from a linguistic minority and underrepresented group, I understand Wikipedia's volunteer-driven nature. I apologize if my concerns seemed misguided.
Your comment, although well-intentioned, was perceived as dismissive, causing unintended hurt. I appreciate your dedication to Wikipedia and value our collaborative efforts. AjayDas (talk) 07:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think you are currently posting on Wikipedia? This is Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia. And I don't have much dedication to Wikipedia. My main wiki is Wikivoyage, and my secondary one is Commons. I take the Commons COM:INUSE policy seriously and believe in letting Wikipedias make their own decisions, which they should do in the interest of encyclopedic accuracy. Citing Commons' COM:INUSE policy is not dismissive. You will never see me state on Commons deletion request threads that Wikipedias should keep inaccurate images in their articles, only whether a file should be deleted or kept on Commons per Commons policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2024/11/11&oldid=974513062"