Wikimore

14 February 2026

16 February 2026

Deletion requests on 15 February 2026

February 15

File:Coat of arms of the Diocese of Tulsa.svg

not the correct coat of arms for Tulsa diocese or any other diocese billdakelski (talk) 02:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep It was created by someone who didn't have permission from the diocese. That's why it's here. If you want the original CoA, then go through the process to ask the diocese if you can use their CoA, get their permission, and then email that permission to Wikipedia. That's why all the CoA's are created and not copied over.Roberto221 (talk) 04:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Speedy keep clearly the correct coat of arms. Darth Stabro (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep The shield is correct and that makes it the correct arms for the diocese. The miter style is traditional, although not the style the diocese currently uses. That, however, is irrelevant as to whether it should be kept or deleted. Farragutful (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Hanafuda deck.jpg

The uploader claims it is own work licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0, but it looks to me like they are not the creator of the image. The images are from this GitHub project by SheldonSChen, which are at least intended to be non-commercial according to this thread. Unless user MinhQuanWiki is in fact the same person as SheldonSChen, I'm not sure whether the image's licensing is compatible with Wikimedia Commons. Spenĉjo (talk) 02:18, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Ourson pyjama.jpg

Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 02:44, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep I cannot found in internet photos of same bear as on this photo, so assuming this photo is made by author of this toy. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 08:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Vaquita II.jpg

Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 02:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep I cannot found in internet photos of same cow as on this photo, so assuming this photo is made by author of this toy.

SomeFancyUsername (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍華 Longhua 紅山6979 Hongshan zone mall shop 盒馬鮮生超市 Freshippo Supermarket check out self service cashiers February 2025 R12S 01.jpg

Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep per COM:De minimis SomeFancyUsername (talk) 08:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 廣州 Guangzhou 食店 restaurant n 佛山 Foshan 高明區 Gaoming 中華老字號牌海天 China Time-honored brand 調味醬 Sauce bottle label 蒜蓉辣醬 Chilli carlic January 2024 R12S 02.jpg

Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep per COM:De minimis SomeFancyUsername (talk) 08:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 廣州 Guangzhou 食店 restaurant n 佛山 Foshan 高明區 Gaoming 中華老字號牌海天 China Time-honored brand 調味醬 Sauce bottle label 蒜蓉辣醬 Chilli carlic January 2024 R12S 01.jpg

Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep per COM:De minimis SomeFancyUsername (talk) 08:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Ribor (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: this is an AI-generated image (with two slightly different versions). If this image was generated based on a freely licensed photograph, please upload the original.

Omphalographer (talk) 03:19, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

It is not an AI picture ! I have the negative : it is the scan of the original (I change light and contrast to enhance quality... but I post the original and the enhanced by mistake)

Ce n'est pas une image IA ! J'ai le negatif et c'est le scan de l'original; J'ai juste modifié luminosité et contraste pour l'émliorer... mais j'ai posté par erreur l'original et la version améliorée Ribor (talk) 08:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Flag of Dar Raj 1699-1801.png

Out of scope: this is an AI-generated image; it was not "digitized from physical copy". Is there any factual source for this supposed flag? Omphalographer (talk) 03:21, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Should not be deleted. Image obtained from here-

Jammu Heraldic Notes, compiled by Capt. H. W. L. Denham, Political Department Press, Lahore, 1904.

Plate XII: “Banner of the Akhnoor Zamindar Household (Darr) TheYellowNeegayi (talk) 04:19, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Мико (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: these are all AI-generated images of flags. Is there any historical evidence of this flag design?

Omphalographer (talk) 03:23, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

They are AI generated - yes. And here are the original pictures. Мико (talk) 10:53, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

This might actually be a case where the AI result is close enough to the original that it might be useful and usable for educational purposes. Nakonana (talk) 21:23, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Jp Okinawa Naha shop Tondou ryukyu shinmen noodle restaurant 通堂那霸琉球拉麵館January 2026 N13P.jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Japan. Solomon203 (talk) 03:49, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep possibly de minimis, since there are only skewed & de-focused pictures. Note this is taken in a private property, thus not a FOP case. Mzaki (talk) 07:34, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

File:El hijo del hombre 001.png

per COM:TROPHY --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@JJPMaster and Aafi: this has VRT permission: ticket:2026020810001815. What even is this? Why is there an apple instead of the dude's head? Could this image still be useful if the trophy (which looks like a FIFA trophy) was blurred? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 04:18, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz, well honestly I just hit undelete button given the request came from a VRT agent. I'd agree that this image seems bit useless and should be deleted.. _signed,Aafi ^(talk) 14:10, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Aafi, I tried searching myself and found https://www.rosario3.com/ocio/De-Manzanas-una-banda-rosarina-con-impronta-hibrida-y-mutante-celebra-sus-20-anos-20250514-0011.html (from w:Rosario3, a TV station). It features other images of apple head man. (not to be confused with w:The Son of Man, but possibly inspired by) It's a musician/band, apparently. The other images there don't show any trophy, so the trophy is not essential. So I went ahead and blurred the trophy.
Could a VRT agent enter the source and author? I doubt the permission came from "digital newspapers" or "Unknown author". - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:50, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

The email came from an address that implies association with the band, who presumably employed the author of the work. I do not doubt the validity of the permission. JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 16:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I left a short note on the ticket. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 17:26, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

While I consider my permission valid, I doubt that this file is within the scope of Wikimedia Commons. It is effectively a promotional poster for the band, to the extent of my understanding. JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 16:53, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

What's the deal with Special:ListFiles/Garbarino Tendino? File:El Hijo del Hombre.jpg is the same as this file, the rest are photos from performances and album art. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:58, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Aitzina logoa.png

Spanish logo, might have "uniqueness, individuality and distinguishability" in how it renders the text. Abzeronow (talk) 06:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:A purikura booth in Hanoi, Vietnam.jpg

non-free 2D works in Vietnam. Solomon203 (talk) 06:17, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Тарас Шевченко - м. Орджонікідзе.jpg

There is no Freedom of Panorama in Ukraine. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Gloriamacapagal (talk · contribs)

Incomplete information on the origins of these image files as well as dubious authorship claims (in two of the files).

Involved files

File:Gen. Ananías Diokno.png

This might be public domain (possibly {{PD-Philippines-1972}}) but needs more information and the date of first publication of the image. Claimed author is Ramon Diokno (the son of the person depicted in the image) but links to the uploader's user page (User:Gloriamacapagal).

File:Free Legal Assistance Group Freedom Rally.png

Dated 1983. Claimed author is Ramses Filomeno but links to the uploader's userpage (User:Gloriamacapagal).

File:Kaakbay Protest Against Human Rights Abuses.png

Dated 1984. Claimed author: "National Library of the Philippines (distributed by Philippine Presidential Museum and Library)." However, the original photo is unlikely to have been photographed by a government employee or official, given the fact that the subjects of the image are demonstrators and protesters, not pro-government supporters. It is illogical for a government employee or official to ordinarily document the people who oppose them, unless the photography work of the government official/employee was conducted during their operations vs. those protesters. Do note that it occurred during the latter years of Marcos Sr. administration; and even then it is unlikely that authorities or officials would photograph/document the people who oppose them, if outside operations to suppress or capture those people. The scene does not appear to be in the middle of a police or military operation vs. the protesters. All in all unlikely to be {{PD-PhilippinesGov}}.

_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 06:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

Files in Category:Street art in Le Havre

There is no freedom of panorama in France (COM:FOP France). Note that, per COM:GRAFFITI, graffiti is not exempt from FOP rules.

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Plutôt que de supprimer de vraies photos de peintures qui égayent nos murs, Squirrel, vous ferez mieux contribuer positivement. Patrice78500 (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. Günther Frager (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

File:김관용 경북지사.jpg

This image file is not CCO 3.0. According to Uploader, This image is from '통일뉴스'. However, this article is '무단전제 및 재배포 금지'(en:Prohibition of unauthorized presuppositions and redistribution). So this image can't upload in Wikipedia Commons. Lumitime (talk) 09:21, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:서병수 의원.jpg

This image file is not CCO 3.0. According to Uploader, This image is from '부산일보'. However, this article is '무단전제 및 재배포 금지'(en:Prohibition of unauthorized presuppositions and redistribution). So this image can't upload in Wikipedia Commons. Lumitime (talk) 09:26, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Musti en de computer.jpg

Musti is still copyrighted SomeFancyUsername (talk) 09:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Rhodesian Security Forces Logotype.svg

The copyright status of that image appears to be fraudulent - the uploader cannot be the copyright owner as claimed Creuzbourg (talk) 10:34, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Preparing for the big RIHANNA concert in Bucharest back there (28649915790).jpg

The building was completed in 1997 by Anca Petrescu (1949–2013). There is no freedom of panorama in Romania. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2084 A1Cafel (talk) 10:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep – I have certain doubts if a Chinese person (even though with image of some random American building in profile) is capable of judging freedom of panorama in Romania; some submitted deletion requests for files being online for 20+ years are also a bit doubtful..
The Chinese or other Trump(ists) surely could delete whole wikimedia content „per request“, but I doubt if they should.. --Osidor (talk) 11:28, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍華 Longhua 旺民街 Wangmin Street 深圳美術館 Shenzhen Art Museum exhibition 中國剪紙藝術 Chinese paper curting February 2025 R12S 134.jpg

non-free 2D works in China. Solomon203 (talk) 11:22, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍華 Longhua 旺民街 Wangmin Street 深圳美術館 Shenzhen Art Museum exhibition 中國剪紙藝術 Chinese paper curting February 2025 R12S 138.jpg

non-free 2D works in China. Solomon203 (talk) 11:23, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍華 Longhua 旺民街 Wangmin Street 深圳美術館 Shenzhen Art Museum exhibition 中國剪紙藝術 Chinese paper curting February 2025 R12S 101.jpg

non-free 2D works in China. Solomon203 (talk) 11:23, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Escudo Al-Sadd Sports Club.png

This file was initially tagged by Eric Duff as Logo May be PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 11:27, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Note: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Al-Sadd.png. Eric Duff (talk) 02:18, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Well, I am not sure. This is probably in the public domain in USA, so it depends of the country of origin. Anyway, a regular DR is better in this case. Yann (talk) 10:34, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Trix Express model railway layout at Berlin Ostbahnhof

No freedom of panorama for interior views (including train stations) in Germany.

Lukas Beck (talk) 14:31, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:PKP 5 370 003-3 (8014549128).jpg

Nearly a duplicate of File:370003 PKP EU44 - Berlin Ostbahnhof - Torsten Maue.jpg Lukas Beck (talk) 14:40, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:VX BerlinOstbf retouched.jpg

Nearly a duplicate of File:VX BerlinOstbf.jpg Lukas Beck (talk) 14:44, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:My-Fair-Lady-Vintage-Movie-Poster-Original.jpg

At first I thought the poster was from 1964, but after a more thorough search I discovered that it was created in 1969, so it does not meet the requirements to be on Wikimedia. Enciclopedia1993 (talk) 14:49, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Korea-Seoul-Hammering Man 1933-06.JPG

As marked in COM:FOP US situation is more complicated for public artwork installed between 1978 and 1 February 1989. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep Previous UDR for this file can be found here. Consensus seems to be that there is a lack of copyright registration and hence there was no copyright in the work. Also the file was kept in a DR in Dec last year. S5A-0043 🚎 14:01, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep Yes. This image is allowed because the sculpture is PD per UR1 and UR2). --Ox1997cow (talk) 19:04, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Logo Animal Crossing 2019.png

Copyrighted logo, above COM:TOO (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Europlus member staes.png

Unused, raster exact duplicate of vector version of map here: File:Euro Plus Pact participants.svg TDL (talk) 16:09, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Platform 20&21, Guangzhoubaiyun Railway Station, PRDIR 20260214.jpg

This file was initially tagged by TimWu007 as Speedy (db-author) and the most recent rationale was: author. This is not a valid reason for deletion, because of COM:Inuse Lukas Beck (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@L. Beck Removed, and I'm requesting to delete the wrongly uploaded one so that I can re-upload it. Tim (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Is it just a small change? Then you can upload a new version without deleting the old one. Do the two images differ? Then it can be considered whether both images should be kept. In either case, immediate deletion of the image is unnecessary. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:36, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@L. Beck I forgot to blur the faces of the passersby. Tim (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

If you think, this is neccesarry... Lukas Beck (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@L. Beck Yeah, I don't want to post photos of random strangers' faces online, just as much as I hate being caught on camera myself. Or can I upload a newer version now and have the history deleted? Tim (talk) 16:56, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

This is possible to. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@L. Beck Okay, I've already uploaded. Tim (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete old version as the uploader requested Lukas Beck (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Lukas. Nakonana (talk) 21:30, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Convento da Penha e Terceira Ponte com Mar e Vitória ao fundo (edited).jpg

This file was initially tagged by ArionStar as Speedy (speedy deletion) and the most recent rationale was: editor's request; non-improved editing Lukas Beck (talk) 16:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

~~Criterion 7: Original author or uploader (me) requests deletion of recently created (<7 days) unused content. ★ 16:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)~~ Removing my request. ★ 03:40, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Lydia Gitachu.jpg

This file was initially tagged by EugeneZelenko as no source (No source since). However, User:Martinkarari claims that it was his own work. Please elaborate or keep it. NearEMPTiness (talk) 16:37, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Thumbnail resolution, missing EXIF, other problematic upload (also claimed to be own work) do not add too much credibility to own work claims. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Paris - Rue Mouffetard 1468.JPG

There is no freedom of panorama in France. Notice that it being a graffiti is not a valid reason to keep this image, see COM:GRAFFITI. Günther Frager (talk) 16:57, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I did not thought there would be any copyright to claim, but since the picture is in use I would like to overwrite it obscuring the artwork in case the decision will be to delete it. --Phyrexian ɸ 07:11, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Nanaminei sign.png

Need to delete Asambana (talk) 17:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep invalid reason SomeFancyUsername (talk) 18:27, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Zanabus86 (talk · contribs)

At least one of these images uploaded by this editor and claimed as {{Own}} (File:Don Remigio D'Errico e i compagni del seminario.jpg) was taken before 1938. That is so unlikely that it makes "Assume Good Faith" impossible for all of their other images that look to be old.

. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Good evening! I misunderstood the publication date. I've now corrected them all. Thanks! Zanabus86 (talk) 19:14, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

The image is not my own work. It is a historical photograph from the private archive of the D’Errico / Zanaboni family. Zanabus86 (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@Zanabus86: Which image? I see that you added "Richiedo la cancellazione del file. Sono il titolare dei diritti d’autore e desidero ritirare il mio consenso all’uso su Wikimedia Commons." in Special:Diff/1167129342 and 'Motivo della richiesta (es. "Sono l’autore e voglio ritirare il file"' in Special:Diff/1167129742. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Resident Evil Requiem - 4ème Trailer.webm

This image or video was uploaded being licensed. But The problem is that the copyright assertion is based off Capcom France's upload, but Capcom USA's upload shows no such free-use license https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fXVy4mALHLY. We've had cases like this before where the release was not authorized by the head company Boneless Pizza! (talk) 18:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep Uploaded by the copyright holder with a proper license. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 19:17, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep unless the person controlling the Capcom France YT account uploaded them under this license in error (would need clarification probably via reading out per mail). Prototyperspective (talk) 12:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

It's very unlikely it's an error when Capcom France account does indeed select which licenses they use, and have historically also uploaded videos under non-free licenses (Paris Games Week 2024 videos aren't free licensed Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 and 5). ¿For how long has been happening this so-called error now, 8 years? really? TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 12:51, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep, see COM:FREEDEPICTION. As TaronjaSatsuma noted, the license is opt-in. It is tucked away in the video settings, meaning the company went out of their way to release it under the CC BY license (and they're a company, they know what a license means).

Similar situation happened with the Minecraft media uploaded by Xbox Mexico, with all files kept. This is a similar scenario. Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 19:26, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Dabmasterars: All you have to do is set your default license to a CC license and accidentally leave it there, which is exactly what happened with Cartoon Network India. They switched to a CC default license when they were uploading Covid PSAs and never switched it back. Nosferattus (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but as I want to notice, the very Capcom France account has switched off the CC license with some 2024 videos of a specific event they've decided not to publish under a CC but under a Copyright license.

So, Capcom France is actually using different licenses for different kind of videos, and has used CC before and after 2024. The "mistakenly switching the license" case, even if real in some cases, seems weak here. Indeed, they seem to fully understand how Youtube licenses work. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 10:41, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep. As someone who has uploaded to YouTube before, this is a box you have to intentionally check and it's off by default. It's insane to think an employee would accidentally license their video in this manner. EnvironmentalDoor (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@EnvironmentalDoor: That's not true. It's a select list, not a checkbox and it's set to whatever your default license is. And to make it even more confusing, there's no option for "All rights reserved", only "Standard YouTube License" and Creative Commons licenses. Nosferattus (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete I'm sorry, but I must voice my objection and feel this constitutes copyright washing. The original video in question is not released under a free license on either the primary Japanese nor American official Youtube channels. A similar incident occurred with Vogue Taiwan's youtube page. Just because the control is tucked away, does not mean it is the intention of the actual copyright holder, in this case Capcom Japan.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:22, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I have opened a broader discussion on videos by Capcom France here. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 00:30, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
Further comment: I have not received any responses yet at the village pump. It appears that people are more interested in the direct deletion discussion.

Unless anyone objects, I will add every file in Category:Capcom France to the deletion discussion. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 22:05, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
Hold on... I have now discovered there already was a deletion discussion on Capcom France videos at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Phoenix Wright in Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney.png, where it was closed as keep.

Now I do not know how to go forward. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 22:08, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete We've seen this situation before with Vogue Taiwan and Cartoon Network India. National subsidiaries do not have the authority to release IP they don't own under free licenses. If Capcom Japan and Capcom USA say these videos aren't freely licensed, they aren't freely licensed. Despite the false claims above, you do not have to explicitly license each video on YouTube and it is very easy to accidentally leave your default license set to the wrong license, as happened with Cartoon Network India when they were uploading Covid PSAs. Commons:FREEDEPICTION doesn't apply in this case, as Capcom France isn't the copyright owner of these videos. Nosferattus (talk) 15:22, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

The channel did upload videos under the standard YouTube license, as outlined by TaronjaSatsuma. Your other point about the different licenses on the same content makes more sense. The Minecraft video I linked above was uploaded exclusively on Xbox Mexico and Xbox Brazil, licensed CC BY on both channels, which makes that situation mostly cut-and-dried.

This case is more debatable. Another deletion request related to media from Capcom France was kept due to "apparent authority", so this file may still be kept for the same reason. It might also fall under COM:Multi-licensing. Additionally, EnvironmentalDoor is planning on contacting Capcom directly to alleviate any uncertaincies.

Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, I will probably need to update the COM:FREEDEPICTION page (which I also created) to mention more specific guidelines about subsidiaries. Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 16:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

It's been brought up in the discussion Howardcorn33 started that that decision may not have been correct, and even the closer has acknowledged they may reopen it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with Vogue and Cartoon Network: Vogue sells pictures (magazines) and Cartoon Network sells videos (cartoons).

Capcom sells videogames: They're releasing under a Creative Commons trailers and promos of their products. It is on their interest to have their promos to spread as freely as possible.

And they've proved they understand how Youtube licenses work by not-releasing under a CC the content they've chose not to. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 10:46, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nomination and discussion, particularly Nosferattus's comments. Capcom France does not automatically have the right to license this content with a freer license than their corporate parent, we need proof that this was purposeful and authorized. We've seen this before. Pending confirmation from Capcom USA and Capcom France that this was authorized and valid, we should delete. As pointed out on the Copyright VP, "apparent authority" is actually not a valid defense in copyright cases in the United States (which was news to me), so, if anything, we should probably start being more careful about situations like this. 19h00s (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete Obviously violates the precautionary principle, as I noted with the Phoenix Wright image back when that was nominated for deletion. I feel like those who attempt to keep these probably-copyrighted images and videos are attempting to, as the policy says, "get away with it". Pending direct confirmation from Capcom USA, the video should be removed - "apparent authority" is just not good enough as an argument, as demonstrated in previous discussions. Zxcvbnm (talk) 23:29, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Update Not sure how this wasn't mirrored here, but Howardcorn has sent a letter (as in physical mail) to Capcom Europe and will instead relay the response to another Commons user who will post it publicly (presumably also on Village pump). If the license will be confirmed to be erroneous, the file should get deleted. If not (including no response at all), keep. I still stand by my stance that companies generally know what they're doing, especially with details from TaronjaSatsuma. Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 20:00, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure how "no response at all" should be construed as making it fine. In that case, it can be assumed it was confused as spam and discarded. Unless they double-confirm that people have full permission to use it, it should not be used. To go to an extreme, one could potentially make a commercial fan game using "Creative Commons" images from Resident Evil trailers and release it with attribution, and I have heavy doubts Capcom would be okay with that, in fact I think asserting that's a bit ridiculous. Zxcvbnm (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

To go to an extreme, one could potentially make a commercial fan game using "Creative Commons" images from Resident Evil

No, you can't. And those files are CLEARLY labeled in Wikimedia Commons as containing copyrighted content.

Going to a extreme, you could make a book about Resident Evil using "Creative Commons" images from Resident Evil trailers and release it with attribution. Which is perfectly fine.

A trailer being under a Creative Commons does not mean its trademark has been released under any free license. A trailer being under a Creative Commons does not mean the whole character has been released under Creative Commons. Indeed, with the Indian clips was exactly the same scenario: some clips were CC, but that does not affect the trademark or the copyright of the character itself. Leon Keneddy is as much copyrighted as it has always been. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 09:10, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

File:( Resident Evil 2 ) - Trailer de lancement - PS4, Xbox One, PC.webm

This image or video was uploaded being licensed. But The problem is that the copyright assertion is based off Capcom France's upload, but Capcom USA's upload shows no such free-use license https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hFDPKQbtfVE. We've had cases like this before where the release was not authorized by the head company. Boneless Pizza! (talk) 18:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Keep Uploaded by the copyright holder with a proper license. TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 19:17, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Comment for broad discussion, please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Resident Evil Requiem - 4ème Trailer.webm. Boneless Pizza! (talk) 22:49, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

File:06tif.jpg

Obvious copvio, the uploader is not the author of the photo. It was taken in 1997 Yousiphh (talk) 18:47, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Gaceta ilustrada 6 de septiembre de 1958 - Spain - Salvador Dalí.png

This is a copyrighted image. There is no document or discussion indicating that the copyright of this image, uploaded under the name "own work", was obtained with permission from the magazine Caceta Ilustrada. Individual Wikipedia articles can upload the file with "Fair use" if they wanted to. Yousiphh (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Screenshot with unknown copyright status. I suspect copyright violation. We have for example file:2024-06-25 John Nosta no The Future of Medicine 2024 em São Paulo, 010.jpg, taken on the same day, which has no such problem. Taivo (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:2024-06-25 John Nosta no The Future of Medicine 2024 em São Paulo, 022.jpg

also file:2024-06-25 John Nosta no The Future of Medicine 2024 em São Paulo, 021.jpg
Isn't here copyrighted screenshot? Taivo (talk) 20:07, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

please don't nominatate these type of file names for deletion since they use the standardized file naming delete this one instead please https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Idaho_Attorney_General,_2018.svg Putitonamap98 (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

This file was uploaded after File:Idaho Attorney General, 2018.svg. I've been told to delete the older files instead of the newer ones. Also, I can just change the name of File:Idaho Attorney General, 2018.svg to "File:2018 Idaho attorney general election results map by county" once this file is deleted. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 22:14, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@Putitonamap98 See Commons:Deletion requests/File:WA-16-gov-districts.svg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:2012 Washington Attorney General election by CD.svg for context. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Братская могила советских воинов д.Воронино.jpg

also file:Братская могила советских воинов д.Воронино 02.jpg
There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. This is 2006 statue, sculptor can be still living. Taivo (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Community Mapping icon - Noun Project 8677.svg

Duplicate of Community Mapping (8677) - The Noun Project.svg Marnanel (talk) 22:30, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:111th Aviation Regiment Unit Crest.jpg

File is a duplicate of File:111 Avn Rgt DUI.jpg, which has better resolution and is named according to the US Army aviation units naming scheme Noclador (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/2026/02/15