Wikimore

18 February 2026

20 February 2026

Deletion requests on 19 February 2026

February 19

Files in Category:Monument to the Anti-Communist Resistance, Cluj-Napoca

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Romania.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

2006 work by architect Virgil Salvanu (1924-2017), per Wikidata item on the monument. Nakonana (talk) 11:33, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Grance affresco asedio di torino (01).jpg

This is a 1938 painting by Luigi Rigorini (1879–1956) and Antonio Rigorini (1909–1997). Although it copies a composition by Ignace Jacques Parrocel (d. 1722), this specific work is a 20th-century painting. The work remains under copyright in life+70 jurisdictions. Underlying lk (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

@Underlying lk, could you link a photo of the work by Parrocel? If this was an attempt at an exact copy and does not differ in any noticeable way from the original, might it not be covered by the "faithful representation" exception to copyright? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Link. I'd say it looks different enough to not count as a faithful reproduction.--Underlying lk (talk) 04:52, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much. If both photos are accurate, the obvious differences in color jump out at the viewer, and therefore, this copy would obviously be subject to normal copyright laws, as you say. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Aizvikumuiza.jpg

Pre-1930 photograph of a manor house in Latvia. Source is a deadlink so no publication information to determine if this is public domain or copyrighted. Abzeronow (talk) 05:42, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Media without a license as of 11 February 2026

no license.

Krd 06:51, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep Most of these were uploaded to Flickr by the creator and therefore {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}}. Phillipedison1891 (talk) 19:34, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Houghton Highway.jpg

We had a clean version File:Houghton Highway at night.jpg A1Cafel (talk) 07:37, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

You mean have; if we had a clean version, my question would be what happened to it. By "clean", do you mean that the other version does not produce a white screen when enlarged? That happens to me with this version, but I don't know if it happens when other people try to enlarge it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:26, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Smash Into Pieces logo.jpg

Is this loo above COM:TOO? It is the face shield of the drummer (see File:The Apocalypse DJ - Melodifestivalen 2024, Malmö-1.jpg but there it is COM:DM or below COM:TOO due to simple LED lights.) --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:43, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It seems simpler than File:A6 logo.png to me, but I've been surprised by deletions of Swedish logos before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:27, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Antonia Romeo taking oath as Clerk of the Crown in Chancery.png

The file is claimed as OGL, but originates from a personal social media post by the subject without any mention of the Open Government Licence or release under it. The photo is not automatically covered by Crown copyright/OGL just because the subject is a government official. Mike Rohsopht (talk) 10:27, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Ingiloy people flag.jpg

Own work deletion request after 7 days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Краков Ингило (talk • contribs) 12:52, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep. In use across multiple projects. IronGargoyle (talk) 11:39, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete fictitious flag/personal art with questionable educational usefulness and questionable copyright status: the file description says created by a group of individuals, but only one person is listed as the author. Nakonana (talk) 18:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Nakonana — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Схема Вестославского редута.png

Схема была выполнена по спутниковому снимку местности, который искажает объект. Объект на снимке не соответствует историческому плану редута. Mypvo (talk) 13:16, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep invalid DR SomeFancyUsername (talk) 13:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Google translation: "The diagram was created based on a satellite image of the area, which distorts the object. The object in the image does not match the historical plan of the redoubt." The filename translates to "Scheme of the Vestoslavsky redoubt". The categories are inappropriate and not useful. @Mypvo, do we have another diagram of that redoubt? If so, please link it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:39, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Оригинальный план Вестославского редута, созданный на основе архивного документа 1780 годов, представлен в этом файле File:План редута Вестославского.png Mypvo (talk) 03:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, but it lacks the measurements or what I believe to be compass directions that are in this file. Could you add those to that file? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Horpellin (talk · contribs)

dubious free license claim

Gbawden (talk) 13:49, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:La Saône à Lyon, Casernes de Serin, Fort St-Jean et Fourvière.tiff

Problème technique sur le format, l'image n'apparait pas. Elle a été réimportée. Anne Marie (AM Lyon) (talk) 14:03, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Viewable with a couple of clicks, like other TIFFs. In what format do you plan to reupload it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Photographie Matthieu Prise de vue d’une photographie de Matthieu Ricard - mai 2022 - Petit-duc nain - Île des sœurs Montréal.jpg

Copyright violation: Uploader is not the creator of the photograph depicted, and License is CC0. Till (talk) 14:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Thémis on stand 2.jpg

According to https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2025/09/Themis_T1H_on_the_launch_pad2 , the ESA Standard Licence applies here. This licence, https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Terms_and_conditions_of_use_of_images_and_videos_available_on_the_esa_website , is not a a Creative Commons Licence. Kallichore (talk) 14:53, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Ted Williams

category:Photographs distributed by Associated Press states that "AP sells many old photos today from their archives that were not published at the time". Evidence of publication is therefore necessary for these files to be kept.

– Howardcorn33 (💬) 15:57, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Adding the AP link for context. It was added there (the AP News Room online archive and picture library) in 1998, with a copyright statement of ©1958. So it was either published in 1958 or 1998, with a huge difference in rights depending on which one. This is a hard one - it really needs someone with a newspaper archive to go through 1958 sports sections to be sure. Best I've found so far is circumstantial evidence from another AP News Room image . AP News Room makes the same copyright statement, but it clearly was been published in 1958 without a copyright notice, so the News Room copyright assertion cannot be treated as conclusive. This image Not close to conclusive proof for the image in question, but does raise the likelihood that it was not registered Hub Kid (talk) 18:48, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Meriwether Lewis and William Clark.jpg

No Commons:Freedom of panorama in USA for statues. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep According to this source and the wikipedia article, it was erected in 1919, so it's in the public domain in the US. I added the appropriate tag. HurricaneZeta^C 16:29, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep as the principal representative image on the statue's English Wikipedia page. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Keep As it is old enough to be public domain in the US, and the page has been updated accordingly. --PeterCooperJr (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

File:CICT NCC Membership Roster Listing Albert P Dela Cruz.jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:AOTS–HIDA ASEAN Information Security Training Certificate – Albert P. Dela Cruz (2013).jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:CICT Certificate of Participation – Philippine CeC Roadmap 2010 Workshop – Albert P. Dela Cruz (2007).jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:U.S. Department of State IVLP Certificate – Albert P. Dela Cruz.jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:58, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Aren't U.S. government documents all in the public domain, so that screenshots of them would be, too? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

File:Department of Justice Cybercrime Workshop Certificate – Albert P. Dela Cruz.jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:58, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Office of the President – National Cyber Security Plan Certificate for Albert P. Dela Cruz.jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Supreme Court Certificate of Commendation – Albert P. Dela Cruz (2001).jpg

Image uploaded under improper copyright. It's claimed as CC/own work, but it's a screenshot of a primary source document that was uploaded in a misguided attempt at providing "referencing" in a draft. But screenshotting preexisting content does not reify the resulting image into your own original work that would be exempted from the original copyrights, primary source documents wouldn't constitute support for notability in the first place, and uploading screenshots to Commons isn't how we cite references anyway. Bearcat (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Ivica Maček

Low quality caricatures by a non-notable artist with no Wikipedia articles in any language and no other significant coverage - not within project scope

Geoffroi 18:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I also included the category. Kyrgyzstanthefan (talk) 19:15, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

As the one who created the category (while patrolling at hrwiki), let me correct you: there IS a Croatian Wikipedia article hr:Ivica Maček and there may be some offline coverage - not everything was on the internet back in the 1970s and 1980s. The article itself was kept. Just saying, Ponor (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I worked with the author on his Wikipedia article, and I don't believe this is beyond scope. The author is notable (at least per local hrwiki criteria) and many if not all of the caricatures were published in various magazines, as well as displayed in an exhibition back in the 1980s. It's also worth mentioning that he put them in the public domain himself, so there's realistically no reason to get rid of them. ☀ Rȕnolīst | ^þⰁ_č 10:01, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

File:1984 World Chess Championship Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov Naslovnica PCN, LA USA.png: judging by the edges of this file, it was published in some kind of print media, so that there's a chance that the artist is/was notable to some degree.

@Runolist please ask the author to send an email with the public domain release to COM:VRT. Nakonana (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

The hrwiki article has also been around since 17 May 2025, so not sure why the filer arrived at the conclusion that there's no wiki article in any language.

Keep all files if the licensing is fine. Nakonana (talk) 18:37, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Flag Map of Central America (with Honduras flag change).png

The flag map is outdated Kyrgyzstanthefan (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Âbide-i Hürriyet, Şişli, İstanbul (14220735196).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Satirdan kahraman as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: author of this text Reşat Ekrem Koçu was dead in 1975 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q465097). was dead in => died in. The question, though, is whether this was work for hire (protected 70 years from publication) or not (protected 70 years from author's death). If the latter, then indeed it needs to deleted, but should be listed at Category:Undelete in 2046. Jmabel ! talk 19:32, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Actually, this photo is taken from a newspaper article written by Reşat Ekrem Koçu, who died in 1975. As you can see, the writer’s name appears under the headline Günün Işığında Tarih (which means History in the Light of This Day). This article describes both the history of the monument and its physical appearance." Satirdan kahraman (talk) 19:52, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

According to Turkish law, this text is under copyright, because the law states that it will enter the public domain 70 years after the author’s death. Satirdan kahraman (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

@Satirdan kahraman: So you know that Turkish law would not consider this "work for hire"? I simply don't know where Turkey draws that line. - Jmabel ! talk 20:54, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Qarabağ FK v Newcastle United 18 February 2026 (45733).jpg

Because it is Press photo, Logo RGLIHO (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by JULIANISME (talk · contribs)

Complex logos exceeding COM:TOO China, cf. the "Gang Heng" logo example.

Wcam (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

If these logos exceed COM:TOO China, then the following existing logos should also be deleted:

JULIANISME (talk) 05:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep most. Apart from the Sinochem logos, most of these are comparable to copyright-free examples at COM:TOO China. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Ostrogothic Kingdom Flag.webp

There is no historical source for this. This appears to be made up. This fails Commons' purpose to provide educational media content. Peaceray (talk) 20:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

This seems also made up for me but why don't just add the template Fictitious flag? Plantfan (talk) 08:00, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

First, because I did not know about {{Fictitious flag}}. Second, it still should be deleted because it is not in accord with Commons:Project scope#Aim of Wikimedia Commons:

The aim of Wikimedia Commons is to provide a media file repository:
• that makes available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content to all [...]

This came to my attention because it was used in this version of the enwiki article w:en:Ostrogothic Kingdom. As of 9 March 2026, it is fraudulently used on six pages on three different language Wikipedias. Peaceray (talk) 17:46, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I have added {{Fictitious flag}} to the file page. Peaceray (talk) 17:59, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete uncredited duplicate of File:Gothic flag.svg, which then again appears to be a copyright violation as the Commons upload is predated by one day by this post on reddit where the flag is introduced. (The date of the reddit post is shown in a reverse image search via Google Lens.) There's also another reddit post where someone claims to be the author of this flag and points to a Facebook post as the place where the flag was originally introduced (but I can't access the Facebook post to check the date). The username on reddit neither matches the username of the uploader of File:Gothic flag.svg nor the username of the uploader of the nominated file of this DR. Nakonana (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

File:British Colonial administrator Francis Verner Wylie.jpg

Photograph taken by Walter Stoneman (1876–1958) and uploaded from the collections of the National Portrait Gallery, London. So still copyrighted in the United Kingdom until at least 2029 (COM:UK#Known author). As the URAA restored US copyright, this file wouldn't be eligible for undeletion until at least January 1, 2045. ~2026-11192-94 (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Eustace Mandeville Wetenhall (EMW) Tillyard.jpg

1947 photograph taken by Walter Stoneman (1876–1958) and uploaded from the collections of the National Portrait Gallery, London. So still copyrighted in the United Kingdom until at least 2029 (COM:UK#Known author). As the URAA restored US copyright, this file wouldn't be eligible for undeletion until at least January 1, 2043. ~2026-11192-94 (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Neil-Kensington-Adam.jpg

1935 photograph taken by Walter Stoneman (1876–1958) and uploaded from the collections of the National Portrait Gallery, London. So still copyrighted in the United Kingdom until at least 2029 (COM:UK#Known author). As the URAA restored US copyright, this file wouldn't be eligible for undeletion until at least January 1, 2031. ~2026-11192-94 (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

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.

Files uploaded by Geo Sergio Fotografo (talk · contribs)

The artwork depicted is not own work of the photographer. Please provide dates of creation, artist/s names and dates so that the images may be correctly licensed for the artwork.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 17:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Geo Sergio Fotografo (talk · contribs)

Professional-quality photographs, each with differing resolutions and metadata indicating use of different camera models, including three distinct cameras used within the same year (see: link, link, link), yet all are claimed as “own work” by the same uploader.

Underlying lk (talk) 21:20, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Hamza al-Ghamdi 2.jpg

The author is not the government. The actual copyright holder is unknown, so this is a copyright violation. Minermatt122514 (talk) 21:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Starlight~commonswiki (talk · contribs)

Large batch of images uploaded within a short timeframe in 2006, all claimed as own work, with multiple different camera models appearing across the set:

Other images in the batch lack metadata entirely and given the broader pattern, should likely also be deleted as a precaution.

Underlying lk (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it looks very suspicious.

Just out of interest: how did you discover it? A bot? Maxyudin (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep I see no reasons to delete these historical images. Nothing wrong in usage of many cameras (I have even more). Most cameras are very cheap, however. No results in image search to assume copyvios. Юрий Д.К. 21:24, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

The concern isn't "is it possible for to own multiple cameras" - obviously it is. It's the pattern. Checking your uploads, I see long runs with the same camera, maybe switching bodies occasionally but not chaotically. When you do switch cameras, there’s logic behind it. They're used for specific types of shots and there's subject continuity.

This uploader on the other hand - no clean clusters, it's just a grab-bag of random camera models. Which is not how people shoot.

The metadata gaps don’t help either. People do strip EXIF, sure - but not this inconsistently across otherwise unrelated images. Here you have images jump arbitrarily between one low-end camera from the early 2000s to the next, and there is no plausible shooting pattern in which a single photographer would alternate between so many unrelated cheap devices without any consistent grouping, especially while also inconsistently stripping metadata. Which strongly suggests these were random images pulled from the internet.

No results in image search

Would you expect to find any after they've been laundered on Commons for twenty years?--Underlying lk (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Why not? We should hesitate to delete images COM:INUSE if there is no proof even a single one of them was stolen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:49, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep no evidence of stolen photographs. --Mateus2019 (talk) 09:51, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

File:Ahmed al-nami.jpg

The picture is from his Visa and the author is not the government. The author is unknown, so this is a copyright violation. https://web.archive.org/web/20191023115252/http://www.911myths.com/index.php?title=File:Ahmed_al-Nami_Visa_Application_Page_2.gif Minermatt122514 (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Ski Famille - Family Ski Holidays.jpg

Similar image found online multiple months prior to upload: https://tineye.com/search?url=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F8%2F84%2FSki_Famille_-_Family_Ski_Holidays.jpg%2F330px-Ski_Famille_-_Family_Ski_Holidays.jpg&sort=crawl_date&order=asc. Low resolution; account uploaded three images, one of them already deleted as copyvio, and is blocked on enwiki for advertising. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:56, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It would be a shame to loose this superb image. If the copyright holder is also the uploader would it be a copyvio, if he/she had licensed the image elsewhere prior to uploading? Do we assume guilty until proven innocent or innocent until proven guilty? The uploader appears to have only uploaded the three images as his/her totality of activity. The uploader also provided the following image with a dead-link website: File:Content Marketing Periodic Table.png. Absent an explanation from the uploader, which is not likely to be forthcoming, I assume that we must declare a copyvio. HopsonRoad (talk) 13:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

In such cases, COM:PCP usually applies. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:13, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Art-Protocolaire Note-Doctrinale-V2 Friction.pdf

Out of scope: plain text. A strange document in French, possibly an artistic manifesto? Omphalographer (talk) 22:58, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep.

Thank you for your review and for your vigilance, @Omphalographer. I appreciate the work you do to keep Commons clean and relevant.

However, I would like to clarify the nature of this file. While it may look like "plain text," it is actually an artistic artifact belonging to the Protocol Art movement (a direct lineage of Conceptual Art).

In this specific field of contemporary art, the document, the instruction, or the "Note Doctrinale" is not mere information; it is the primary media of the artwork. It illustrates the "administrative aesthetic" and the "ontic turn" described in the French Wikipedia article fr:Art protocolaire.

This document is essential for educational and research purposes as it provides the theoretical framework and the "metrological" instructions for the work of Grégoire Falque. It is a digital component of a conceptual practice, and as such, it falls within the educational scope of Wikimedia Commons.

Best regards, Paulschlactars (talk) 19:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Even as "artistic artifacts", these are out of scope. Wikimedia Commons is not an art exhibition; if you are trying to present these newly created works to the public, you need to do so elsewhere. Omphalographer (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Paulschlactars, if you want to keep a text document, use it in some appropriate article. Normally, texts that are not COM:INUSE are deleted, unless they are considered likely to be used by Wikibooks or Wikiversity. Could you make a good argument for keeping this document on that basis? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:54, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/2026/02/19

February 19

Files in Category:Monument to the Anti-Communist Resistance, Cluj-Napoca

Files in Category:Media without a license as of 11 February 2026

Files uploaded by Horpellin (talk · contribs)

Files in Category:Ted Williams

Files in Category:Ivica Maček

Files uploaded by JULIANISME (talk · contribs)

Files uploaded by Geo Sergio Fotografo (talk · contribs)

Files uploaded by Geo Sergio Fotografo (talk · contribs)

Files uploaded by Starlight~commonswiki (talk · contribs)