Commons:Deletion requests/2026/03/12

March 12

User:Moki8/relayuserbox

replaced with User:Moki8/userboxes/relay Moki8 (talk) 01:41, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Files found with Special:Search/chaom pung

False claim of own work, Corbis (stock image) watermark visible. However, date published is unknown due to site being down, could possibly be PD. http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/42-25641351/a-group-of-young-women-stand-and

TansoShoshen (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, I never said this was mine. I just cropped it because it appeared, to me, that it was allowed. MoonsMoon MoonsMoon 01:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
@MoonsMoon It's fine, just trying to get this cleared up. TansoShoshen (talk) 05:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Joe Sims CPUSA.png

Footer of the source website reads "Licensed under Creative Commons" but does not specify the conditions or version of the license, thus making it an inadequate release. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 02:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Comment the website have contact section, you can write letter to them to clarificate CC license. SomeFancyUsername (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Julus Serafien D'haene.png

Out of scope: this is an AI-generated image. AI images of identifiable people are generally not permitted on Commons. If this image was generated based on a freely licensed photograph of a notable individual, please upload the original. Omphalographer (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

This image is not AI generated. This picture was taken in 2021 bij my wife at a wedding of the depicted's grandchild. I was there as direct family. ZettaZon (talk) 07:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
This image contains C2PA metadata which specifically identifies it as having been generated or modified by ChatGPT. Omphalographer (talk) 07:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Apparently my wife used ChatGPT to remove the shoulder of a person standing next to him. Is this an issue?
This photo is used on his mourner page and grave.
https://www.rouwcentrumvanbever.be/condoleer.aspx?id=250f4cb8-eb74-4a5c-8ef4-b8b83b56159f ZettaZon (talk) 08:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Even if the picture is in scope, permission from Marijke Thoen via COM:VRT is necessary. See also File:Julus Serafien D'Haene.jpg. Jcb (talk) 06:20, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Ongoing VRT process: ticket:2026031610002146. Jcb (talk) 07:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Ironmouse fan art by whitebearym dfml721-414w.jpg

No evidence of permission, its source states that it is licensed under a noncommercial and nonderivative license. Amogus502 (talk) 03:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Wikisavoirs.svg

Concept d'identité visuelle non retenue Enfantôme (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Albert Hesse.jpg

circa 1930 German photograph. Would need death date of photographer to keep since pre-1995 German works cannot be anonymous if photographer was ever known. Abzeronow (talk) 03:31, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  •  Keep {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} If the creator becomes known it can be clawed back from the public domain. I cannot find an attribution to any photographer. --RAN (talk) 05:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    • German law does not to my knowledge work like that. It cannot be considered anonymous. Abzeronow (talk) 03:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Guten Tag, allseits,
ich sitze gerade beim Tag der offenen Tür im Lokalen Raum Hannover neben dem rechtmäßigen Erben der Urheberrechte, namentlich über den Nachlass der Tochter des Abgebildeten, namentlich Renate L. eine professionelle Fotografin. Es handelt sich bei der abgebildeten Personen um den Großvater des rechtmäßigen Erben der Urheberrechte. Der Erbe wird demnächst eine Ticket Freigabe beantragen und die notwendigen Formalitäten erledigen.
Es wird daher darum gebeten, dass das Foto zunächst nicht entfernt wird, bis ist eine Tickethinterlegung erfolgt ist. Triomint69 (talk) 10:56, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Es wird ein Löschen des Eintrages angedroht. Es geht um das im Beitrag abgebildete Foto. Das Foto ist ein privates Fotos und stammt aus dem Familienbesitz - Albert Hesse ist mein Großvater. Meine Mutter Renate Lux, die Tochter von Albert Hesse, ist inzwischen auch verstorben und ich bin der Erbe dieses Fotos. Es gibt keine anderen Rechte-Inhaber. Es besteht also kein Grund den Eintrag zu löschen. ThomasXul (talk) 09:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

@ThomasXul: If you are the photographer's heir, we can keep this. Your grandfather being the subject means nothing in regards to copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 03:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Ich habe heute noch einmal die Herkunft des Bildes (file:Albert Hesse.jpg) geprüft.
Es stammt aus dem privaten Familienalbum meiner Mutter Renate Lux und ist mit der Kennzeichnung 1944 als Jahresangabe versehen. Das muss nicht das Aufnahmedatum des Fotos sein, der Zusammenhang ist die Hochzeit von Renate Lux im Jahr 1944.
Renate Lux war Fotografin. Auf der Rückseite des mir vorliegenden Papier-Fotos ist kein Eintrag. Weder von Renate Lux noch von einem anderen Fotografen.
Renate Lux ist im Jahr 2023 gestorben. Ich bin testamentarisch bestätigter Erbe.
Mir ist nicht klar, wo ich das von Ihnen erwähnte template mit der Doppelklammer {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} einfügen muss. Oder erübrigt sich das auf Grundlage meiner Erklärung? ThomasXul (talk) 09:39, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

File:StatueSaloméUreña 2021-12.jpg

The VRTS permission only applies to the photo; there is no evidence that Alex Beckenkamp was the sculptor.

There has been no valid Freedom of Panorama in the Dominican Republic since March 2007, when the 2006 CAFTA-DR amendments came into effect, restricting FoP to personal uses of architecture and artworks. The plaque/marker indicates it was installed as a tribute from the Ministry of Culture in 2011, with no named sculptor. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 03:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Santo Domingo - Ciudad Colonial 3010.jpg

This is the same statue as that of Commons:Deletion requests/File:StatueSaloméUreña 2021-12.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 03:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Antonio Flores.jpg

Probably not own work, added elsewhere without license clear CoryGlee (talk) 04:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Monumento a los Héroes del 30 de Mayo

There has been no valid Freedom of Panorama in the Dominican Republic since March 2007, when the CAFTA-DR-US-compliant revision to the copyright law took effect. The revision restricted FoP to personal uses of images of anything permanently seen outdoors. As per the category description, the monument dates to 1993. The sculptor died in 2003.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 04:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Accpac Plus screenshot.jpg

non-free software screenshot JaydenChao (talk) 06:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Weak keep per {{PD-simple}} SomeFancyUsername (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Fam Haisma.jpg

Source is mistaken about the author, Andrys was apparently born in 1953 and was webredactor of the source website. From what I can find, he seems to be a collector of old pictures rather than the photographer. For now we have no information on the real photographer, 1938 is way too recent for {{PD-old-assumed}} and given the nature of the picture anonymous work as soon will be assumed by uploader, is highly unlikely. Jcb (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Keep Tresoar (Centre for Frisian History and Literature) should have made two things more clear. (1) Andrys Stienstra is indeed the person who made this photo digitally available, but not the original photographer. E-mail from Tresoar to me earlier this week, 9 March 2026 (3 days before this DR): "in het verleden [werd] bij 'maker' dan niet de maker van het oorspronkelijke werk ingevuld maar de maker van de reproductie" - Tresoar was already correcting these mistakes in their databases and will also correct this one. (2) The source license is not correct. Tresoar noted CC-BY-4.0, which evidently should be PD-anon-70, in line with Article 38: 1 of the Dutch Copyright Act - as the name of the photographer is unknown. Tresoar e-mailed me today this will also be corrected at the source. I will change both in the description of the image in Commons. Vysotsky (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
I knew that you would play this card again, but there is no evidence at all that this would be 'anonymous' work. Jcb (talk) 11:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Oh, and this one is recent enough for the URAA monster as well... Jcb (talk) 11:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
 Comment License at source corrected to PD. Vysotsky (talk) 12:58, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Still made up, based on a mistaken interpretation of Dutch copyright. Jcb (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

File:UlbevanHouten.jpg

Unknown copyright situation. Source website states that the copyright situation has not been evaluated. The stated 1900 is obviously incorrect, given that the depicted person was born in 1904. This picture must be from the late 1920s or 1930s, way too recent for {{PD-old-assumed}}. No indication at all that this would e.g. be anonymous work. Jcb (talk) 07:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Keep The stated 1900 is indeed incorrect. As the source had no year, I intended to put 1920s, as I did in the caption of the photo in Ulbe van Houten. As Van Houten was born in 1904, his time as a soldier in the Dutch Army must have been somewhere in the 1920s. This photo was either made by an army photographer or a friend or family member, but is in any case unknown. Therefore Article 38.1 of the Dutch Copyright Act applies. This photograph is in the Public Domain. I will correct the year in the description. Vysotsky (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Please stop misusing this law article. The article is about 'anonymous' work, not about situations where we don't know who the photographer was. There is no indication at all that this would be anonymous work. Jcb (talk) 11:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
 Comment License at source corrected to PD. Vysotsky (talk) 13:01, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Still made up, based on a mistaken interpretation of Dutch copyright. Jcb (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Files found with Special:Search/204247713@N06

Flickrwashing. New flickr account with only these photos

Gbawden (talk) 07:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

These files were made available under CC-BY-SA by their respective photographers, who are different individuals from the subjects pictured. The Flickr accounts used to upload these images were created specifically for this purpose, which may explain why they appear as new accounts with limited activity. This is a common practice when authors wish to release their work under a free license for the first time.
I would like to understand the correct process to verify and substantiate the CC-BY-SA licensing claim for each of these files. Specifically:
  1. What documentation or evidence is required to demonstrate that the photographers have authorized their respective images under CC-BY-SA?
  2. Is a written statement from each photographer submitted via the OTRS/VRT ticket system sufficient?
  3. Are there alternative verification methods accepted by Commons in cases where the uploader and the copyright holder are different individuals?
I am willing to coordinate directly with the photographers to obtain the necessary permissions documentation. Please advise on the appropriate steps to proceed.
Hrishikesh.kb (talk) 03:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Al Akhawayn Campus.jpg

Morocco doesn't seem to have FoP: Rockfang (talk) 08:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Peter Vignau-Wilberg.jpg

author request – missing consent Pippich (talk) 08:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Wilhelm Wilberg.png

author request – missing consent Pippich (talk) 08:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Wilhelm Wilberg.tif

author request – missing consent Pippich (talk) 08:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Niehoff surrendering Breslau.jpg

please delete. when uploading I was unaware that exactly the same photo was already in the Commons, see File:Gen-H--Niehoff-udaje-sie-do-willi-Colonia-celem-po.jpg Szesnasty (talk) 09:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:ЦДІАК 1167-1-255 Метрична книга єврейської громади м-ка Коростишів про народження (1876).pdf

duplicate of c:File:ЦДІАК 1167-1-254 Метрична книга єврейської громади м-ка Коростишів про смерть 1875.pdf Madvin (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Amtraksignfront.JPG

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

So, a small poster by a government agency is a FOP violation now? ----DanTD (talk) 09:11, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
You know there are other signs at Amtrak stations with these posters, don't you? ----DanTD (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment -- Additionally, this work was by the same government-owned corporation. ----DanTD (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Reformationsmonumentet

The monument was completed in 1943 by Max Andersen (1892–1972). There is no freedom of panorama in Denmark for non-architectural works. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2043

A1Cafel (talk) 10:00, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Екатеринбург - panoramio (16).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Russia A1Cafel (talk) 10:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)


 Weak keep per COM:De minimis SomeFancyUsername (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Дорога - panoramio (941).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Crimea A1Cafel (talk) 10:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)


 Weak keep per COM:De minimis SomeFancyUsername (talk) 15:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Editoratlargemd (talk · contribs)

Wildly different exif data, resolutions, style. Very unlikely all own work.

Gikü (talk) 10:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:1961-10-23-Auguri-Buon-Compleanno-01.jpg

Not freely licensed. Derivative work of a Disney 1959-1961 copyrighted work. The illustration has a copyright notice at bottom right: © W.D.P. ~2026-15712-91 (talk) 11:22, 12 March 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 Henrimpetiet (talk · contribs)

Very unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Obviously not OK, deleted. Yann (talk) 20:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:53, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Henrimpetiet (talk · contribs)

2 have sources like Caserne des Pompiers, Avignon (France) / Program for the Avignon Theatre Festival 2012 - I don't think the own work claim of the other 2 is valid

Gbawden (talk) 11:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:GovertKlaske1943.jpg

No author information, unknown copyright situation. 1943 is way too recent for {{PD-old-assumed}}. No indication at all that this would be anonymous work, as uploader will soon assume below. Therefore Article 38.1 of the Dutch Copyright Act does not apply.. Jcb (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

This one is also so recent that the URAA monster applies. Jcb (talk) 12:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
 Keep You seem to take delight in this. I'd like to stick to the facts. I maintain my position that Article 38.1 of the Dutch Copyright Act applies, as established by a Dutch Court Case (appeal) in 2020. First line: "Foto’s die meer dan 70 jaar geleden anoniem zijn gepubliceerd, zijn niet meer auteursrechtelijk beschermd." ("Photographs published anonymously more than 70 years ago, are no longer protected by copyright".) The same position is stated in the last (5th) edition of the Dutch handbook Auteursrecht (2025). I would gladly lend you my copy. Regarding URAA: I fail to see how an unknown photographer could go to a US Court to claim his or her copyright, but that's another matter. I dare say the license {{PD-anon-70-EU}} is perfectly fit for these photographs that are not under Dutch copyright any more. Vysotsky (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Again, anonymous is NOT the same as unknown. You seem to keep ignoring that on purpose. Jcb (talk) 00:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
No, I did not ignore that. You apparently didn't read the court case I mentioned above. The case was about postcards without a notice of the photographer visible on the card, so the photographer was unknown to the archive. The archive published the postcards online in good faith. In Dutch juridical terms, "unknown to the archive" is called "anoniem". (Van Dale: Anoniem: naamloos, wiens naam of waarvan de naam niet bekend gemaakt wordt; [...] zonder ondertekening.) I will draw attention to this discussion in the Dutch section in Commons ("De Kroeg") to get some feedback on this topic. Vysotsky (talk) 22:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
That court case is not applicable to this file. This does not seem to be a postcard and even if it would be a postcard, the backside is missing. Jcb (talk) 23:14, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
We should cite the entire Article 38:
Het auteursrecht op een werk, ten aanzien waarvan de maker niet is aangeduid of niet op zodanige wijze dat zijn identiteit buiten twijfel staat, vervalt door verloop van 70 jaren, te rekenen van de 1e januari van het jaar, volgende op dat, waarin de eerste openbaarmaking van het werk rechtmatig heeft plaatsgehad.
Translated:
"The copyright on a work, of which the creator has not been mentioned, or not in a way that clearly reveals their identity, expires after 70 years, calculated from January 1st after the year of publication."
So the Dutch copyright has expired. Wikiwerner (talk) 12:18, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
This would only be true if you can show that the creator did not reveal their identity at publication. In this case we have no indication that the creator was anonymous at the time and also we do not know of any publication before 1956, so we cannot use this article for two reasons. Jcb (talk) 15:08, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
I traced the photo back to the original source at Tresoar. This organisation (preserving Frisian cultural heritage) states in the metadata of the photo: "Auteursrechtbepaling: geen auteursrecht (publiek domein); Vervaldatum auteursrecht: 2014 ca. PD conform art. 39 van de Nederlandse auteurswet" - {{PD-anon-70-EU}}. Vysotsky (talk) 15:37, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
Meaning that they had the same misunderstanding about this article as you. You tried to find support in the NL village pump for your misinterpretation of Dutch copyright, which you didn't get. Jcb (talk) 22:55, 20 March 2026 (UTC)Ans
It would take a long time to address all misinterpretations ("crucial point photo being not published") and sideways (Karel Appel was a known painter; FoP is no issue here) in that discussion. Main point: I can't see how a copyright statement about PD on the website of an institution of cultural heritage can be labelled as a "misunderstanding". And that's an old discussion where Jcb has been proved wrong in the past. Vysotsky (talk) 11:20, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Nobody has 'proved' me wrong so far when I respond to your mistaken view on Dutch copyright. So far you have be unable to show any evidence that this would be anonymous work. Jcb (talk) 21:45, 23 March 2026 (UTC)'=
I am not mistaken re Dutch copyright. I referred to the Dutch Copyright Act, the verdict in the Court Case (applicable to both postcards and photographs) and the handbook Auteursrecht (2025), all mentioned above. In Dutch juridical terms "unknown to the archive" is called "anoniem". I rest my case. Vysotsky (talk) 09:22, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
No, that's simply not true. 'anoniem' means that the author did not make their identity known. In the case of this picture there is no indication of that. If the information gets somehow lost, that doesn't make it 'anoniem'. And no, your court case does not apply to this file. Jcb (talk) 22:52, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
 Comment License at source (Tresoar Archive): Public Domain. Vysotsky (talk) 13:05, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
Still made up, based on a mistaken interpretation of Dutch copyright. Jcb (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

File:John Wolcot (Peter Pindar). Stipple Wellcome V0006343.jpg

This poor quality scan is superfluous to its two constituent parts, File:John Wolcot (Peter Pindar). Stipple engraving by Roberts aft Wellcome V0006343ER.jpg and File:John Wolcot (Peter Pindar). Stipple engraving by W. Ridley, Wellcome V0006343EL.jpg. -- Deadstar (msg) 12:43, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Blason des Le Coat de Saint-Haouen, selon Potier de Courcy.svg

Superseded file: the original uploader corrected the wrong colour of the up right trefoil (#0000ff instead of #fff) by uploading a new file instead of overwriting the existing one.
Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Micron San Jose.png

A newer file has been uploaded. Malaysia Skyline (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:FrançoisVatel.png

The source, creator, dating of this engraving is unknown. It may not even depict Vatel and it is certainly not an authentic depiction. Its educational value and copyright status are unclear. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 14:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  •  Comment. File is in use across multiple projects. IronGargoyle (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Kagedor (talk · contribs)

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused logos.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Kollegah (2025).jpg

This deletion request also applies to:

I do not think that the image was taken by the real uploader or was ever published under a free licence. When we take a look at matching images on the web I doubt that the uploader is the author. The image was posted to facebook on 2025-10-12. It was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons on 2025-12-03. The list of uploaded files all have the same style and are mostly limited to that artist. It looks like your classic copyvio account that uploads a few copyvios only for the user never to be seen again. Another example would be Felix Blume "WEEK OF LEGENDS".jpg that was painted by the person in the images (Felix Blume) and can also be found on facebook with no indication about it being published under a free licence. Yet the uploader claims the source to be their "Own work" and claiming themselves as the author ("Wikinavigator.00") --D-Kuru (talk) 15:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

May also need to be deleted:
These images have the same problem(s) and the are also more than likely copyvios.

Either the uploader has a huge plethora of high quality cameras from different manufacturers (Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, SONY ILCE-7M4 and ILCE-1, FUJIFILM X-T5, NIKON Z 9) that they seem to use like single use cameras and also uses different software to develop the images or (in my opinion much more likely) the images are just stolen from somewhere. --D-Kuru (talk) 15:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

(C): Felix Blume (Kollegah)
(C): Mert Bayer (Zymba)
Wikinavigator.00 (talk) 08:47, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
1) To which files you are referring to?
2) The main question is what the person's intend was and what rights they have. Usually people do not share their works for them to be published under a free licence - it also must not be assumed as such. If the images were taken by somebody else (eg. a photographer) they usually only sell the customer the right to use and not to relicence the image. We have to be very specific here.
--D-Kuru (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Hoe ontstaat migraine.webm

The source has a NC and ND restriction in the description: "Voor niet-commercieel gebruik is het toegestaan om fragmenten (mits context behouden) te gebruiken." Jcb (talk) 16:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Official Portrait of the President of the Republic of Lebanon.jpg

This portrait originates from the official Lebanese Presidency website (presidency.gov.lb), which publishes official state documentation. As such, it is a government work released for public record and ceremonial use. While not explicitly marked under Creative Commons, official portraits of heads of state are generally considered public domain in Lebanon as part of state documentation. The file is therefore suitable for Commons under the “official government work / public domain” rationale, provided attribution to the Presidency is maintained. It should not be deleted. MinRv (talk) 16:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Gaia20ehk-sky-dss-best.jpg

DSS is copyrightː https://gsss.stsci.edu/Acknowledgements/DSSCopyrights.htm Lithopsian (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Atishi Marlena.jpg

no permission for depicted portraits MinRv (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Atishi.jpg

no permission for depicted portraits MinRv (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Church of Sant’Edoardo.jpg

Privacy violation: the pepole in the photo are cleary identifiable, and haveb't given their consent for this pubblication. this is a violation of the G.D.P.R. Andreverp (talk) 17:09, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  •  Keep. No valid reason for deletion. Does not appear to violate COM:IDENT for Italy and calling the people pictured "clearly identifiable" is dubious at best. IronGargoyle (talk) 05:53, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Amul dark chocolate, made from coco beans.jpg

per COM:PACKAGING. ~2026-15711-39 (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:9-4-33 Parc des Princes, équipe Excelsior de Roubaix Agence Rol btv1b53269548v.jpg

duplicate of File:9-4-33,_Parc_des_Princes,_équipe_Excelsior_de_Roubaix_(football)_-_btv1b53269548v.jpg - sorry H4stings (talk) 18:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:On This Day… 1776 Ben Franklin.jpg

Per COM:AIIP. Also, quite low quality: there are misgen issues in the clothing, and the face has weird folds and shadows that don't make sense. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

 Keep this represents a notable work by Darren Aronofsky, On This Day… 1776. Numerous news outlets have highlighted/complained about how ugly/creepy the renditions of historical figures look (ex. Gizmodo uses this image as the first illustration), so this is “the subject of non-trivial coverage by reliable sources” and therefore not a violation. Dronebogus (talk) 23:58, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
 Delete As the own uploader (author) has said in the past "If it’s AI it’s slop" ;-) (citation here). Additionally this is a low quality creepy image, never used and we have lots of Benjamin Franklin art pictures to ilustrate any article. --Willtron (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
1) I am not the author; you clearly didn’t read the file description; 2) ignore anything this person says or nominates about AI files I have uploaded, I nominated their AI images for deletion and now they’re on a revenge nominating spree. Dronebogus (talk) 11:18, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Weak  Delete, for the same reasons as the Washington one, only not so strongly here. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
 Keep This isn't "some Wikipedian tried to generate an image of Ben Franklin", it's a still from a famous AI-generated movie by Darren Aronofsky. Satisfies AIIP by being a notable work depicting real people. The movie is very bad (I made it through all of two episodes), and famous more for its negative reception than anything, but notable nonetheless. — Rhododendrites talk |  14:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Once again, if it's here on the basis of being a screenshot, are we absolutely sure that we have the rights to do that? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
AI has no copyright in the united states Dronebogus (talk) 21:27, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Spekulative Evolution (Mondmenschen).jpg

Unused low-quality AI image Dronebogus (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

 Delete low quality, not useful. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Setzer Robelet.jpg

Liegt eine Einverständniserklärung des Urhebers Bundeswehr/Sebastien Robelet vor? Berlinschneid (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Chris Campbell photo.jpg

Suspected Copyright Violation. File is present on https://www.composerchriscampbell.com/about, and is also present on this page in the wayback machine from prior to the date of upload to Commons: upload date to commons was in Mar2026, and this picture is present on the Dec2025 snapshot of the page. Only a suspected copyvio, as I do not see copyright marks on the source webpage. Uploader of this image to commons added "photo credit" in en.wiki on a caption of this image that the picture may be from an individual named Aaron Rice, see diff here. Jiltedsquirrel (talk) 18:28, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Gazmend Barbullushi, Ambasador i Shqipërise në Mbretërinë e Vendeve të Ulta në 2009.jpg

license bogus – see meta data with different photographer Albinfo (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Gazmend Barbullushi.jpg

license bogus – see meta data with different photographer Albinfo (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Kujtim Ferid Berberi Ymer Pampuri.jpg

doubtful source – own image from 1971 of two prominent sportsmen? Albinfo (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:057 AStyle Novo Lagovo OSM.png

Street naming is old. AStyle (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  •  Keep. Not a valid reason for deletion. File is in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 05:55, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma.png

no permission for depicted portraits MinRv (talk) 20:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:1N8A2310.jpg

no permission for depicted portraits MinRv (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Official portrait,2025.jpg

no permission for depicted portraits and copyright violated MinRv (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I’m LiLi Tokyo Dreamgirl,herself. I took the picture by myself.That’s my selfie. I have rights for my pictures. ~2026-15811-43 (talk) 20:13, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
 Comment the above comment appears to be regarding File:LiLi Tokyo Dreamgirl.jpg and not the portrait of Manjinder Singh Sirsa marked for deletion applecuckoo (he/him) 04:45, 13 March 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 EYo237 (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, no EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 09:35, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 00:49, 7 August 2025 (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 EYo237 (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: personal certificates of (Wikimedia) course completion.

Omphalographer (talk) 20:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:13, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by EYo237 (talk · contribs)

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:AI Chatgpt generated Woman in Welcome pose.png

Unused AI generated image Dronebogus (talk) 20:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Keep File is currently is in use in my enwiki userpage, so not need to delete. Cptabhiimanyuseven (talk) 16:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

File:BUCHANAN-Nat 2.JPG

Per the COM:PCP and the URAA - there's a few decades during which time this plaque could have been erected which would make it public domain in the USA. Without knowing when, exactly, it was published, we can't be confident that it didn't have its copyright restored. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Pergamon World Atlas

Files were either overlooked when deleting the atlas, or recreated. Either way: Still under copyright by (afaik) defunct organizations who did not release the content for PD.

Enyavar (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by User:Mtrizio

Mtrizio (talk · contribs) states that all four of their uploads are own works, but some of them can be found online in other sources, in part published earlier then the Commons upload: (note the file name), . File names and missing EXIF data also suggest that these are not own works. --Entbert (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Basílica e imagem de Santo Antônio.jpg

This doesn’t look like AI but if it is we shouldn’t be using fake images of real places Dronebogus (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Yati Octavia.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Tanty Josepha.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Usbanda.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Drg. Fadly.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Pong Hardjatmo.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Eddy Gombloh.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Hengky Solaiman.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Muchsin Alatas.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Nico Pelamonia.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Ratno Timoer.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Enny Haryono.jpg

No indication that this was published under a CC-0 license. This image was originally included in Misbach Yusa Biran's Apa Siapa Film Indonesia, published with a copyright notice in 1978; even if there was a CC-0 release, filmindonesia.or.id would not have been the rights holder.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Cut Mini.jpg

No indication of a CC-0 release. FFI is a private organization, despite taking government money, and the assumption would be that works are copyrighted unless specifically noted. Furthermore, source is to a homepage rather than a specific page, making confirmation more difficult.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Dewi Irawan.jpg

No indication of a CC-0 release. FFI is a private organization, despite taking government money, and the assumption would be that works are copyrighted unless specifically noted. Furthermore, source is to a homepage rather than a specific page, making confirmation more difficult.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Gina S. Noer.jpg

No indication of a CC-0 release. FFI is a private organization, despite taking government money, and the assumption would be that works are copyrighted unless specifically noted. Furthermore, source is to a homepage rather than a specific page, making confirmation more difficult.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Raihaanun.jpg

No indication of a CC-0 release. FFI is a private organization, despite taking government money, and the assumption would be that works are copyrighted unless specifically noted. Furthermore, source is to a homepage rather than a specific page, making confirmation more difficult.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)