Commons:Deletion requests/2026/01/20

January 20

File:Indian Navy Insignia (2022).svg

Current license does not make sense. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:BRO Flag.svg. Jay8g (talk) 04:21, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

The copyright holder of the work is the Government of India but it can be reproduced and published as it is comes under edict of government (Template:EdictGov-India/en). Soap Boy 1 (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Also under Template:GODL-India all shareable non-sensitive data available either in digital or analog forms but generated using public funds by various agencies of the Government of India, all users are provided a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, adapt, publish (either in original, or in adapted and/or derivative forms), translate, display, add value, and create derivative works (including products and services), for all lawful commercial and non-commercial purposes, and for the duration of existence of such rights over the data or information.
The file is shared by the government here through Press Information Bureau - https://www.pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1880977&reg=3&lang=2 and the uploader has modified it, which is allowed according to the National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy (NDSAP) of the Government of India. Soap Boy 1 (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
Emblem of the navy is more than 60 years old so it technically have entered public domain in India according to Template:PD-India. The logo was originally issued before 1947 - File:Crest of the Royal Indian Navy (1947).svg (1) but was tweaked firstly after India became a republic in January 1950 - File:Indian Navy Insignia.svg and recently in September 2022 - File:Indian Navy Insignia (2022).svg when new naval ensign was unveiled - File:Naval Ensign of India.svg (2). Soap Boy 1 (talk) 12:56, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
The IN crest consists primarily of standard heraldic elements (Ashoka lion capital, shield, anchor, ribbon, and text) in a straightforward arrangement with no significant creative expression. It falls below the U.S. threshold of originality required for copyright protection (see Commons:Threshold of originality and examples like File:United States Army Central CSIB.svg). As such, it is not copyrightable in the United States, so URAA restoration does not apply. Combined with its PD status in India (as a government edict/emblem over 60 years old), the file qualifies for PD-India and should be kept. Soap Boy 1 (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
The current emblem was designed in early 2020s, so no point in discussing earlier designs here. Even if it still was relevant, there is a lot of difference between a simple "A" and this naval crest. The file neither qualifies for COM:TOO US nor COM:TOO India not PD-India. Shaan SenguptaTalk 16:50, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Batik Air PK-LBS damage.jpg

Although this file is in the public domain in Indonesia, that alone isn't enough. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States: "Note that all files hosted on Wikimedia Commons must either be in the public domain in the United States, or available under a free license valid in the United States. This is in addition to any public-domain/licensing requirement dependent on country of origin." This file isn't in the public domain in the United States. Looking at COM:TAG United States, none of the PD-US tags apply to this file.

Template:Attribution would not apply. The template states: "The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted." The NTSC allows redistribution, but it does not state that their works are allowed to be used "for any purpose", nor does it state that "Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted." Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:41, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

The following have also been nominated for deletion:
Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:48, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
 Speedy keep since when are government works copyrighted in the US? why would an foreign goverment copyright their works in the US when their own laws state that their works are not copyrighted?? nonsense, you'd have to delete 50k files in Category:PD Indonesian Government + various other countries. ~TheImaCow (talk) 13:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
See: "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." (emphasis mine). Commons:Licensing "is considered an official policy on Wikimedia Commons. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that everyone must follow. [...]" (italics mine). Keeping this file would go against Wikimedia Commons' policy and standard. I'm going off what Commons:Licensing, Wikimedia Commons' official policy, is saying. I'd say it's pretty worrying that pretty much nobody has bothered to comply with this policy despite the requirements for PD being at the top of one Wikimedia Commons' major policies. All foreign public domain works must include a PD-US tag. And what PD-US tag would apply in this case? None. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:22, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
Just to add, foreign works can be in the public domain in the country of origin but copyrighted in other countries. It's not a matter of a country copyrighting their work in other countries, it's just that different countries have different copyright laws. In this case, we have to follow US copyright laws as Wikimedia Commons is based in the US. If Wikimedia Commons were based in Indonesia, these files would be free to use as they are in the public domain there; as Commons is based in the US, we have to follow their laws (using the tags at COM:TAG United States). Here are actual copyright laws regarding public domain:
  • Per Hamilton College : Public Domain Outside the U.S. – Copyright laws of other countries can be very different. A work that is in the public domain in the U.S. is not necessarily in the public domain outside of the U.S., and vice versa. […] In other words, if you intend to use the work only within the U.S. you should make a public domain determination based on the U.S. copyright law. […]
  • Per Cornell University : Foreign works published after 1928 are likely to be still under copyright in the US because of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) modifying the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). […]
  • Per the Dominican University of California : If you are in the U.S. and you are trying to determine the copyright status of a foreign created work, then the first presumption is that U.S. law applies to make that determination.
Aviationwikiflight (talk) 05:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
What you're saying would be valid if you were talking about photos that are privately copyrighted in Indonesia, but if the Indonesian government owns the copyrights and says it's public domain, you're saying they could still sue people for using the photos outside of Indonesia? If that's the case, you need to cite Indonesian law allowing the Indonesian government to do that, as the Indonesian government is bound by their own laws. This seems like an absurd deletion request. Commons has onerous licensing rules, but that isn't a reason for Commoners to tie themselves into knots to find imaginary pretexts to delete files for no good reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek probably not free, see Template talk:PD-IDGov#References to recent discussions. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 02:11, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
I read that, thanks. Quite an abstruse bit of law, but OK, it authorizes the Indonesian government to distribute its own images... Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
  •  Delete all. They're not PD for any reason in {{PD-IDGov}} (assuming that this is a valid English version). That template reminds us that the government wasn't infringing when it published that photo ("[a]cts [...] executed by or on behalf of the government"). Article 43 is explicitly about the act of publication, distribution, communication and/or reproduction, not the product of those acts. (Even though in English we might say that the act of "publication" generates a product called a "publication", the law is referring only to the act. We can see that by looking at how articles 41 and 42 refer to "works" instead.) Commons is hosting the product, and would purport to offer it freely, but it is not empowered to do so by article 43, because it is not the government of Indonesia or acting on its behalf. Although I'm not opposed to transwikiing for purposes of fair use, I don't think all of those together will withstand w:en:WP:NFCC (for example). TheFeds 10:20, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by User:917ph from mehansa.com

These files are potentially copyvios, but would have to check each one. The source site isn't unfortunately around and IA didn't archive every page, so it may be impossible to find the source link for every image. Didn't seem the mehansa.com sourced their images . --Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 07:56, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Meant to say didn't seem mehansa.com sourced their images. Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 08:10, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Lordo'Web (talk · contribs)

All files falsely claim to be the author's own work. No information is provided about the true authors, no source links are given, and consequently, the licenses are incorrectly set. The images could probably be kept with proper source attribution and correct licenses.

זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 10:03, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Delete Most of these are images that are not remotely plausible for a living person to have created. The licenses are thus false and given the page creator's lack of grasp of copyright (see , , ), I do not believe even plausible own work claims are valid here. While most if not all of these images can likely be appropriately licensed and re-uploaded, given this user's track record, I cannot trust them to provide the correct license information. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Keep All. I stopped adding individual keep tags. Attributions and licenses fixed, 1 January 1966 is the cutoff date to be PD in India and the USA. Most of the images have been released as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported by the photographer. What we have is a new user, uploading with the default settings, as most people did. The new upload form is supposed to make it more clear how to attribute and date, the copies of historic images. --RAN (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Keep all the coats of arms and flags, since they were all created before 1950, and File:Muli Flag.png is also too simple to be protected by copyright. Поль Крол Злой Диктатор (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

File:PK-THT crash site 2.jpg

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States: "Note that all files hosted on Wikimedia Commons must either be in the public domain in the United States, or available under a free license valid in the United States. This is in addition to any public-domain/licensing requirement dependent on country of origin." This file isn't in the public domain in the United States. Looking at COM:TAG United States, none of the PD-US tags apply to this file. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep, I'm not the first nor will be the last to use the tag, but I assume these country-specific license tags existed here in Wikimedia for a reason and for it to exist it would have to comply with Wikimedia's guidelines in the first place. Deleting this file would cause a huge precedence. Jauhsekali (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
See: "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." (emphasis mine).
Commons:Licensing "is considered an official policy on Wikimedia Commons. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that everyone must follow. [...]" (italics mine).
Keeping this file would go against Wikimedia Commons' policy and standard. The fact that it has been incorrectly used (and still is) is not a justification to keep doing so. These country-specific PD tags exist to tell users when a file in a foreign country is in the public domain, since a PD file has to be PD in both countries. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:33, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Delete Wikimedia is based in United States, so every copyright license should be valid also in the United States to prevent copyright infringement, which isn't the case here. Protoeus (talk) 00:46, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
 Speedy keep since when are government works copyrighted in the US? why would an foreign goverment copyright their works in the US when their own laws state that their works are not copyrighted?? nonsense, you'd have to delete 50k files in Category:PD Indonesian Government + various other countries. ~TheImaCow (talk) 13:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
I'm going off what Commons:Licensing, Wikimedia Commons' official policy, is saying. I'd say it's pretty worrying that pretty much nobody has bothered to comply with this policy despite the requirements for PD being at the top of one Wikimedia Commons' major policies. All foreign public domain works must include a PD-US tag. And what PD-US tag would apply in this case? None. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:20, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
I mean it is kind of unfair to expect a foreign country to also have public domain images for the US. Why would Indonesia want to make their files public domain for the US? I think 90 percent of all files on Wikimedia could get deleted because of this. Zaptain United (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
It’s not unfair. Every country has different copyright laws, and if you want to use an image in X country, you have to follow their copyright laws. It’s not about wanting to make files free for the US. Simply, Wikimedia Commons is based in the US so we have to follow US laws regarding copyright. Indonesian Government works are public domain in Indonesia, but since countries have different laws, whether PD Indonesia images can be used varies. In this case, these files do not meet the criteria for PD-US.
It’s already pretty clear that US-based Wikimedia Commons policy requires foreign public domain works to be in the public in the United States, but for the sake of it, here are actual copyright laws:
  • Per Hamilton College : Public Domain Outside the U.S. – Copyright laws of other countries can be very different. A work that is in the public domain in the U.S. is not necessarily in the public domain outside of the U.S., and vice versa. […] In other words, if you intend to use the work only within the U.S. you should make a public domain determination based on the U.S. copyright law. […]
  • Per Cornell University : Foreign works published after 1928 are likely to be still under copyright in the US because of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) modifying the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). […]
  • Per the Dominican University of California : If you are in the U.S. and you are trying to determine the copyright status of a foreign created work, then the first presumption is that U.S. law applies to make that determination.
Should I go on? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 18:51, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
Yes, instead of general copyright paranoia, quote some actual cases where the indonesian goverment (or any government) has claimed copyright for works in other countries while they are not under copyright in their jurisdiction. ~TheImaCow (talk) 12:02, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
I may be wrong, but I don't think such a case has ever happened, not that that proves anything at all. Instead, I'll cite more copyright laws (italics mine):
  • Works Published Abroad After 1 January 1978 – After 1 March 1989 – Published in a country that has copyright relations with the US: 70 years after the death of author, or if work of corporate authorship, 95 years from publication
  • 3. After March 1, 1989, all works (published and unpublished) are protected for 70 years from the date the author dies. So, for example, the unpublished works of an author who died in 1943 are in the public domain as of January 1, 2014. For works of corporate authorship (works made for hire), the copyright term is the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation.
  • Each country has its own unique copyright laws that govern intellectual property (like copyright) in that country. A country's copyright laws only apply to works created and used in that country. This means that the copyright an author holds in the United States may not be valid in other countries. [...] – Am I required to follow the copyright laws of other countries in the U.S.? – Generally, the copyright law of the country you are in applies within that country. This is true even if the work you are using originated across international borders.
  • Copyright and public domain determinations are dependent on jurisdiction. When you are working in only one jurisdiction, this is relatively easy. Generally speaking, users of copyrighted or public domain works should follow the law of the country in which they are making the copyright determination. So, if you are part of an institution working in Mexico, then you should follow the law of Mexico to make your copyright determinations. [...]
  • If you are reproducing, publishing, distributing, or displaying a work in a foreign country, you will need to investigate the copyright term in that country [...].
This is not copyright paranoia. This is adhering to copyright laws and official Commons policy based on copyright laws.
And in addition, let's take Template:PD-India (and its variations) as an example. The template states that "This work is in the public domain in India because its term of copyright has expired or it is ineligible for copyright", but at the same time, "You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States." The same goes for Template:PD-Taiwan, Template:PD-PRC, Template:PD-New Zealand, Template:PD-Canada, Template:PD-South Korea, Template:PD-Japan, Template:PD-Uruguay, Template:PD-Georgia, etc... Care to explain that? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:07, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
You are right that there dosen't to appear to be a specific US copyright tag or law making public domain works by other governments also public domain in the United States. -I certainly don't know about any-.
However, files like that have been on Commons without any problems for the last 20 years. I see no reason as to why this minor detail should be anything to care about; again, why would a government register copyright for their works in foreign jusdictions when they're free of copyright in their own. Dosen't makes any sense to me whatsoever.
This "change" in longstanding practice you're advocationg for, for unclear reasons, will affect literally hundreds of thousands of files, and will certainly need wider disussion than this obscure DR here. ~TheImaCow (talk) 19:13, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
I too was under the initial impression that foreign PD files were also PD in the US, until I discovered that this wasn’t the case (this fact is already known at Wikipedia’s Featured Article process). Your suggestion that we disregard copyright laws is concerning (and is akin to what COM:PRP states: "Also, arguments that amount to "we can get away with it", such as the following, are against Commons' aims[.]") Whilst looking around for more information, I found this paper from Siobhan Leachman which states: "Because the Wikimedia Foundation has servers in American, American copyright law also applies to any content I want to reuse on those projects. So in order to reuse content I not only have to navigate New Zealand copyright law, I also have to ensure the content I want to reuse is either appropriately licensed for reuse or out of copyright under American law." Aviationwikiflight (talk) 01:15, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
For example, The Diary of Anne Frank had to be removed from Wikisource because it was still copyrighted in the United States, despite it being in the public domain in the Netherlands. See this BBC article and this statement by Wikimedia Foundation’s legal counsel for more information. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
I'd like to point out again that I am not talking about "general PD outside US but not in US" like Anne Frank, I am talking about "PD government work outside US, no clear law/rule on this in US". Not only are there no cases where foreign governments have claimed US copyright on their works which are not copyrightable in own jurisdictions - this simply wouldn't make any sense whatsoever. COM:PRP which you are quoting requires "significant doubt", and when you're unable to even quote a single case where that happened from any county, we're far away from that. ~TheImaCow (talk) 11:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
So because there hasn’t been a single reported case, copyright laws are disregarded? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
Yes. Such minor technicalities such as that here which have absolutely no basis in reality - are disregarded.
Foreign government work --> Free of copyrights under their laws --> Zero reason for them to register US copyright.
~TheImaCow (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
Fully agreed, unless there are Indonesian laws that allow their government to sue for breach of U.S. copyright of public domain files. We don't need to emulate Alice in Wonderland to try to find illusory copyright violation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
The laws clearly state what is or isn't allowed and cannot be discarded because they supposedly "have absolutely no basis in reality" so this is not a case of "illusory copyright violation". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
What Indonesian law allows the Indonesian government to sue for breach of copyright in foreign countries of documents issued by the Indonesian government that are in the public domain in Indonesia because of that? If there isn't any such law, the fact that those documents would otherwise still be under copyright in the U.S. is obviously null and void. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  •  Delete. Such works by the Indonesian Air Force Information Service are automatically copyrighted in the US since Indonesia joined the Berne Convention 5 September 1997 per COM:Indonesia, as no part of {{PD-IDGov}} applies.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:06, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
  •  Comment Isn't {{PD-IDGov}} essentially an application of {{PD-Self}}, where the local government has preemptively declared {{PD-Self}} for a broad set of works? Some countries choose to make their government works free with a license (e.g. {{OGL}}), others make their works Public Domain (e.g. {{PD-IDGov}} or {{PD-RU-exempt}}) - it would be ironic for us to respect the former and not the latter when the former is more restrictive. It seems like a bigger discussion may be needed as this could affect 10,000s+ of files across multiple countries. -Consigned (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

File:SITES Spectre.jpg

False authorship - who is Craig K Lee? There exists a "Craig" (no surname) admin at the forums of gunsite.co.za, but this old user seems to purport to be this guy from this website without good evidence and has uploaded this file that is not their own work EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk) 18:41, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

To clarify- this is an inactive commercial news site, and my suspicion is that the File is a corporate-owned proprietary image that Craig, the forums' infrastructure admin and perhaps a co-owner of the business, wouldn't be releasing. I also doubt the uploader is really Craig. EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk) 18:58, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Please do a little more fact checking. The forum is very much active on that domain. I uploaded a photo of my personal firearm.
I took and uploaded this photo thank you for the recognition that this was a quality photo.
let’s leave this image. There is little information about these and even fewer pictures.
thank you, Craig Craigklee (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
I thought the forums had no activity after 2021 but I now see that there is a little trickle of chat within the past month. May I email you at your forum admin address Craig@gunsite.co.za? EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk) 18:47, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
No further correspondence has occurred between the uploader and I EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk) 16:29, 23 January 2026 (UTC)
@EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth @Craigklee still no correspondence? Nakonana (talk) 19:11, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
None EnjoyLightEnjoyTruth (talk) 02:47, 25 March 2026 (UTC)