Commons:Deletion requests/2026/01/17

January 17

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 LuzViMindaLife (talk · contribs) | Package

COM:PACKAGE

茅野ふたば (talk) 09:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Files uploaded by LuzViMindaLife (talk · contribs) | Balai Adlao

Part of the same Balai Adlao complex authored by MFS Architectural Design (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Adlao building.jpg). There is no Freedom of Panorama allowing Philippine works to be exploited by Internet users and content creators without permission from the designers of those works of art.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 02:37, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Margaret-craig-portrait-001.jpg

Per COM:PCP as likely copyvio. The copyright holder in the exif metadata cannot be linked to the user. Nv8200pa (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Delete Taken from San Antonio Art League int site. ~2026-23864-08 (talk) 15:38, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Handmade crochet doll depicting the Grinch.jpg

Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 03:16, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment, not sure if the doll is "handmade" by the uploader, but if the doll is indeed handmade by the uploader, then the image may be fine to keep. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 00:32, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Shuichi Abe and Wanisa 20251007.jpg

Per COM:COSTUME A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Shuichi Abe and Arukuma 20251007.jpg

Per COM:COSTUME A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Shuichi Abe Wanisa and Arukuma 20251007 02.jpg

Per COM:COSTUME A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Shuichi Abe Wanisa and Arukuma 20251007 01.jpg

Per COM:COSTUME A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:United Nations Memorial Cemetery | Memorial Service Hall

The Memorial Service Hall was inaugurated in 1964 and authored by Korean architect Jung-Up Kim. Since South Korea does not permit commercial Freedom of Panorama, all of these nominated images infringe on his (posthumous) copyright.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 04:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:New Zealand memorial at the UN Memorial Cemetery.jpg

This was dedicated on November 19, 2005. However, there is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea. A commercial Creative Commons licensing authorization from the memorial designer is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 04:58, 17 January 2026 (UTC)


From the UNMCK website : "Unlike the UN Sculpture Park and the Peace Park, which are public parks created and managed by the Nam-gu district office, the UNMCK is NOT a public park. The UNMCK is a cemetery established by the United Nations Command during the Korean War for the interment of UN forces who were killed in action.
The UNMCK is an international organization with a governing body (Commission for the UNMCK) that is distinct and separate from local and national governing bodies and is thus is subject to regulations that differ from those of public parks." Mztourist (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete - The land of the UNMCK (cemetery) is subject to the all the copyright laws of South Korea. -- Ooligan (talk) 06:15, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Canadian memorial at the UN Memorial Cemetery.jpg

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea. The Canadian Memorial Statue was inaugurated in 2001 and authored by: Mr. Vincent R. Courtenay (designer) and Mr. Young-moon YOU (sculptor). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:03, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

From the UNMCK website : "Unlike the UN Sculpture Park and the Peace Park, which are public parks created and managed by the Nam-gu district office, the UNMCK is NOT a public park. The UNMCK is a cemetery established by the United Nations Command during the Korean War for the interment of UN forces who were killed in action.
The UNMCK is an international organization with a governing body (Commission for the UNMCK) that is distinct and separate from local and national governing bodies and is thus is subject to regulations that differ from those of public parks." Mztourist (talk) 05:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete - The land of the UNMCK (cemetery) is subject to the all the copyright laws of South Korea. -- Ooligan (talk) 06:21, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

File:UK memorial at the UN Memorial Cemetery.jpg

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea. The memorial was dedicated in 2010. No sculptor or artist is named in the UN website source. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:05, 17 January 2026 (UTC)


From the UNMCK website : "Unlike the UN Sculpture Park and the Peace Park, which are public parks created and managed by the Nam-gu district office, the UNMCK is NOT a public park. The UNMCK is a cemetery established by the United Nations Command during the Korean War for the interment of UN forces who were killed in action.
The UNMCK is an international organization with a governing body (Commission for the UNMCK) that is distinct and separate from local and national governing bodies and is thus is subject to regulations that differ from those of public parks." Mztourist (talk) 05:56, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
@Mztourist but United Nations is not a country or territory that can pass a copyright law. For sure, the land on where the UN memorial sits is subject to the restrictive South Korean copyright law. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 07:40, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
No, as detailed above the UNMCK clearly states that is not the case.Mztourist (talk) 08:28, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
@Mztourist you mean it is not part of any country? It's hard to believe in this case. UN Headquarters in New York City are bound under US copyright law. UNESCO headquarters in France, under French copyright law. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 10:50, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
That's what UNMCK says. Mztourist (talk) 06:15, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
@Mztourist I think you're assuming no copyright law exists for UNMCK. Yet the website also states "Copyright(c) 2020 by UNMCK". For sure UNMCK recognizes the copyright law of South Korea as the copyright law in effect over the area. The exclusion of local and national governing bodies does not cover the exclusion of intellectual property rights over the artworks in the area. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 09:00, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
I'm not saying no copyright law exists for UNMCK, I'm saying that the UNMCK website indicates that Korean copyright law may not apply there. Mztourist (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete - The land of the UNMCK (cemetery) is subject to the all the copyright laws of South Korea. -- Ooligan (talk) 06:22, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:National Memorial Museum of Forced Mobilization under Japanese Occupation

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea, and these freely licensed images infringe on the architectural and sculptural copyright. The museum was established in 2008, while the main building was completed in 2014.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:15, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Only the memorial might fall into that deletion category, otherwise no outdoor photo in Korea could be uploaded. Mztourist (talk) 05:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete per @JWilz12345 -- Ooligan (talk) 06:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:United Nations Peace Memorial Hall

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea. This is a probable modern building, yet the museum administrator's website does not indicate when this was completed and who was its designer (if the designer hasn't died for more than 70 years, this buildings is unfree to be reproduced in commercial Creative Commons licensed media).

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:19, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Its a picture of a building in South Korea, not a sculpture or work of art, so the rule you refer to does not apply.Mztourist (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
@Mztourist South Korean copyright law does not allow commercial exploitations of architectural works, though. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 07:41, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete per JWilz12345. -- Ooligan (talk) 06:19, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:National Maritime Museum, South Korea

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in South Korea. The museum was opened in 2012. These images under commercial Creative Commons licensing do not have clearances from the building designer/s.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:25, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you trying to delete photos of every building in South Korea? Mztourist (talk) 06:32, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
For File:단독요트세계일주을 한 선구자 2호다.jpg, the building in the background was incidentally included, so it should be kept.--Namoroka (talk) 06:32, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
And the design of yacht is not under copyright protection.--Namoroka (talk) 02:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Seoul montage.PNG

One of the images in the montage was deleted A1Cafel (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Бассейн спортивного клуба «Физкульт».jpg

This file was initially tagged by Komarof as Dw no source since (dw no source since) Krd 06:12, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:2014 Language Day at DLIFLC (13961197927).jpg

This file was initially tagged by JM082 as no license (No license since) Krd 06:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep {{PD-USGov-Army}}. JJPMaster (she/they) 02:59, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:2014 Language Day at DLIFLC (13961237267).jpg

This file was initially tagged by JM082 as no license (No license since) Krd 06:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep {{PD-USGov-Army}}. JJPMaster (she/they) 04:40, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:2014 Language Day at DLIFLC (14144541651).jpg

This file was initially tagged by JM082 as no license (No license since) Krd 06:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep. EXIF data says "Official photo taken by a government employee in the performance of their duties." Uploaded on a Flickr account for a U.S. Army installation. {{PD-USGov-Army}}. JJPMaster (she/they) 02:26, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:2016 DLIFLC Language Day (27100099635).jpg

This file was initially tagged by JM082 as no license (No license since) Krd 06:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep {{PD-USGov-Army}}. JJPMaster (she/they) 02:42, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Sparrowhawk.webm

This file was initially tagged by Shao as no license (No license since) Krd 06:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

I strongly oppose deletion.
This video was captured by myself. What kind of evidence I should provide? Shao (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
Then why did you slap "No license" tags on it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Oculus de l'Assomption de la Vierge Marie de la Cathédrale de Cambrai 01.jpg

The artwork is integrated into the ceiling of Cambrai Cathedral, but it is too recent. There could be a copyright issue. JackyM59 (talk) 07:38, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Oculus of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary in Cambrai Cathedral - Work by Augustin Frison-Roche, 3.78 metres in diameter, installed 21 metres above the floor at the crossing of the transept.

Author's email address found on their website  : augustinfrisonroche@gmail.com

File:Oculus de l'Assomption de la Vierge Marie de la Cathédrale de Cambrai - Présentation.jpg

Oeuvre intégrée au plafond de la cathédrale de Cambrai mais trop récente. Il pourrait y avoir un problème de copyright. JackyM59 (talk) 07:39, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Johnny & Associates logo1.svg

Not a real SVG Mvcg66b3r (talk) 09:49, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Speedy keep per COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Johnny & Associates logo2.svg

Not a real SVG Mvcg66b3r (talk) 09:50, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Speedy keep per COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:U Hla Saw.png

seem like the photo is digitally altered. The similar photo has been found on Irrawaddy with the credit "Htet Naing Zaw/Irrawaddy] (28 December 2016). The background is different. Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 10:35, 17 January 2026 (UTC) Template:Subst : delete3

File:U Kyaw Tun Aung.png

a screenshot from RFA's YouTube video which is under the YouTube Standard license. Part of the gemini logo is seen right bottom of this screenshot. Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 10:40, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

The link seems to be incorrect here? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Mg Paw Tun.png

unlikely to be own work. the same photo can be found on here dated 14 August 2022. Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 10:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Tomi Halonen.jpg

According to metadata, photo is by Anna Dammert, but uploader's username suggests the photo is uploaded by the person depicted. Still, own work is claimed. No proof of free licensing by original photographer. Lentokonefani (talk) 11:16, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Instructed the uploader on their talk page on the process of getting permission from the original photographer and having them send it via VRTS. --Lentokonefani (talk) 11:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Comet c2023A3.jpg

Poor quality comet photo, we had better choices in the category A1Cafel (talk) 11:34, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Neutral Quality isn't bad, but it is quite small (640x480 px). --C messier (talk) 12:22, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
 Keep good enough, the main subject is visible Lukas Beck (talk) 20:25, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

File:TakenokoBambooSprouts.jpg

Low resolution, no EXIF info, unlikely own work. Solomon203 (talk) 11:52, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:U.S. states with Tobacco 21 laws.svg

Duplicate of File:United States states with Tobacco 21 laws.svg. cookiemonster755 (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Thorotrast.jpg

I took this photo as an employee of Oak Ridge Associated Universities NOT a National Laboratory as you indicate.. This is a non-profit company. I was not a Federal worker. Permission was not give to use this photo. ~2026-36384-8 (talk) 14:04, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Contact the COM:VRT. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Άγιος Νεκτάριος (49963005793).jpg

This church building as well as the whole monastery complex were built in their current form during the period between 1973-1994. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted, at least, for now. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:04, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Άγιος Νεκτάριος Αιγίνης - panoramio.jpg

This church building as well as the whole monastery complex were built in their current form during the period between 1973-1994. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted, at least, for now. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:04, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Lee Majdoub Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Premiere 2024.png

License laundering – The video description says "All materials provided by EPK.TV". 0x0a (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:MW Teuerung in der Schweiz zZ 1. Weltkrieg.jpg

Duplicate of File:MW Teuerung ber.jpg (in incorrect orientation). Nakonana (talk) 15:11, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:HEC Paris, Doha.png

No freedom of panorama in Qatar A1Cafel (talk) 15:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)


 Keep simple building design Lukas Beck (talk) 21:19, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Inscriptions on a tablet, Miyin Temple.jpg

No FoP for 2D works in China. This is a Chinese poem written by Yi Fengkui (易凤葵). Yi Fengkui was born in July 1947 and is still alive. His works are protected by copyright. This was uploaded by mistake. Huangdan2060 (talk) 15:29, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Памятный знак на пути следования отряда Салавата Юлаева на соединение с войсками Емельяна Пугачёва.jpg

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. This is 1977 monument and protected with copyright until 2073 (95+1 years from publication) – in Russia maybe more, depends on when the sculptor M.P. Kartashov died. Taivo (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Михаил Петрович Карташов lived from 1939 until 1988, per . Undelete in 2059? Nakonana (talk) 16:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Антона Петрова 148 2016.09.05.jpg

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. I do not know, who the sculptor is and when (s)he died. The plaque is created likely after depicted person's death in 1988. Taivo (talk) 15:58, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Can't find the author, but the plaque was installed in 1990. Nakonana (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Памятник Г.П. Башарину.jpg

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. This is 2016 statue, sculptor A.A. Romanov is likely still living. Taivo (talk) 16:27, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Sculptor Афанасий Афанасьевич Романов was born in 1953, none of the sources I checked mentioned that he died, and the linked source says that he turned 70 (meaning he was definitely still alive in 2023). Nakonana (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Памятник гагарину.jpg

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. This is 1980 statue and protected with copyright in USA until 2076 (95+1 years from publication). The sculptor ru:Дюжев, Борис Иванович died in 2003 and the statue is copyrighted in Russia until 2074 (70+1 years from death). Taivo (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Small correction: the sculptor died in 1998, not 2003. Copyrighted in Russia until 2069. Nakonana (talk) 18:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Igriddi (talk · contribs)

Files uploaded by blocked user on Russian Wikipedia: Special:CentralAuth/Igriddi

Btrs (talk) 16:32, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Delete Both files seem to be out of COM:SCOPE. Not used in any articles, no description, no educational value. File:IMIii.jpg seems to also be a scan or photograph of a copyrighted work, so there is also unclear copyright status on this one. Regards, ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:55, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Часть памятника дымковской игрушке - panoramio.jpg

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculpture and probably the photo violates sculptor's copyright. The sculpture looks modern. I do not know, who the sculptor is and when (s)he died. Taivo (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

According to , the sculptors are Владимир Александрович Бондарев (born 1940), Клара Ивановна Коциенко (born 1941), and Михаил Михайлович Плохоцкий (born 1980). Nakonana (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
And it's a sculpture from 2010 according to the same source. Nakonana (talk) 17:52, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Emma Starr.jpg

Small photo without camera data, the uploader's last remaining contribution among copyright violations. I suspect again copyvio. Taivo (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Hethitisches Gefäß.JPG

Archäologische Objekte aus der Türkei unterliegen einem strengen staatlichen Schutz und stehen in staatlichem Eigentum. In der Beschreibung wird das Objekt als „hethitisch“ bezeichnet, was jedoch nicht nachgewiesen ist. Zudem bleibt die Provenienz unklar, was auf eine möglicherweise illegale Ausfuhr hindeuten könnte. Nehemie.strupler (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Keep There is no rationale why the photograph of this object should be deleted. --Leyo 21:44, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
    • First, without a documented provenance, an archaeological object has no scientific value and cannot serve as reliable evidence. The claim that the object is Hittite is therefore unfounded. Such an attribution is a factual assertion that requires verifiable proof, for example through documentation in a recognized museum collection or a scholarly publication. Statements in Wikipedia must be supported by reliable evidence. WP:RS
    • Second, according to the statements of the individuals involved Diskussion:HJunghans, the object in question originates from an undocumented (aka illegal) excavation. Objects of this kind, lacking a known provenance, should not be published. In Germany (and more broadly in Europe), the interpretation of the UNESCO Convention of 14 November 1970 on the illicit transfer of cultural property is applied. Under this framework, editors and publishers are required not to publish any artifacts, whether from private or public collections, whose legal origin has not been clearly and unequivocally established.
    • Third, if it is from Türkiye ("hittite"), the local law shold also be observed. Did you have checked it?
    Nehemie.strupler (talk) 09:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Keep These are good thoughts, but not necessarily the right conclusions. Please elaborate:
    • First: Does WP:RS apply also to Wikimedia Commons?
    • Second: Is Wikimedia Commons a "academic and scholarly publication"?
    • Third: Do you assume that the photograph has been taken in Turkey? --NearEMPTiness (talk) 13:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
    1) Yes. If the file states that the object is something it is not, this is problematic. It is not Hittite.
    2) I consider Wikimedia to be an encyclopedia and therefore of the view that it should respect the UNESCO Convention (This is serious, has it is about protecting heritage and I doubt Wikicommons would like to be associate with illegal activities)
    3)I assume that either the object was taken from Turkiye, in which case this would be illegal, or it originates from an illegal excavation, which would likewise make it unlawful. Nehemie.strupler (talk) 16:37, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for elaborating. Based on these assumptions, it is fair that you requested, to delete the file. However, requests for deletions should not be based on assumptions but on proven facts. If it is not Hittite, we do not need to not need to observe the laws of Türkiye, as it could be any old (or even new) clay pot. Thus, I still prefer to keep it on Wikimedia Commons. Whether it should be used in the Wikipedia article, is a different and more reasonable question. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 17:08, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
It is why I asked first the user to rename his file. As far as I know, you have to prove that something is right, not that something is wrong. So if it is said that something is “Hittite,” then this has to be proven. I asked for it to be deleted because I do not think I can ask for it to be renamed. If Wikimedia Commons wants to archive every user’s flower pot, I would not mind that much ;-) But I am still amazed if Wikimedia Commons does not have any rules concerning material from illegal excavations, because by promoting such material on Wikimedia Commons, the Wikimedia project would be supporting cultural destruction, and I cannot believe that this is true. If you need literature about why promoting illegal excavation support the destruction of heritage, let me now... Nehemie.strupler (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Der Löschungsantrag ist abzulehnen. Zu den zugunsten des Löschungsantrages vorgetragenen Gründen: 1. Die bisherige Zuordnung als hethitisch mag zwar schwach sein, ist aber vorläufig die einzig vorhandene. Zweifel an dieser Zuordnung wurden zwar vorgebracht, wurden aber nicht belegt. Die Offenheit zur Korrektur ist ein wissenschaftliches Grundprinzip. 2. Subjektive Zweifel an einer ordnungsgemäßen Ausfuhr in den 1960er Jahren dürfen nicht zu der Unterstellung der Rechtswidrigkeit führen. Im deutschen Recht gilt der Grundsatz, dass der Besitz einer beweglichen Sache für das (rechtmäßige) Eigentum an der Sache spricht. Wer dem Anspruch auf rechtmäßigen Besitz entgegentreten will, muss das darlegen und beweisen, nicht umgekehrt. Auch wenn es hilfreich sein kann, die Herkunft von Besitz beweisen zu können, ist es nicht erforderlich und war bis in die 1990er Jahre hinein auch bei Antiken nicht üblich. Freundliche Grüße HJunghans (talk) 07:39, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Speedy keep per COM:INUSE. If the name and description are wrong, they can be changed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:விடுதலைக்களம்.jpg

no category, no encyclopedic value F (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Johannes Häyhän muistomerkki.jpg

Photo contains artwork of Nina Sailo, so it is obviously copyright violation. (Photo saved to fi-WP, limited usage per Finnish law) Aulis Eskola (talk) 18:10, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Francis Benincà.jpg

Cropped copy of https://www.francisbeninca.com/portrait more precisely https://www.francisbeninca.com/portrait?lightbox=dataItem-j8un3sjk Habertix (talk) 18:41, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Bonjour, tout est ok pour moi. Merci
Francis Benincà ~2026-45450-2 (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

File:9N-AME main wreckage.jpg

Template:Attribution is not valid for use in this case and the extract from the report contradicts the requirements set forth on the template.

  • The template states: "The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted."
  • The AAIC (the investigative agency that published the report) states that: "The extracts may be published without specific permission provided that the source is duly acknowledged, the material is reproduced accurately, and it is not used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context."

The AAIC appears to allow redistribution, but it does not state that their works are allowed to be used "for any purpose", nor does it state that "[r]edistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted." I tried looking for other licenses that could apply to these files, but couldn't find any. None of the requirements at Template:PD-Nepal are met, and per COM:GVT Nepal, "Government of Nepal shall have the copyright over the work prepared by Government of Nepal."

The following files have also been nominated:

 Keep The only restrictions the AAIC mention is attribution and those related to moral grounds. They are allowing extracts to be published and redistributed as long as they are attributed. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 02:50, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
Besides the fact the Nepali Government works are copyrighted as stated above, the attribution template cannot be used; where do the AAIC say that they allow their files to be used for any purpose, including for derivative use and commercial use?
In addition, Commons:Licensing states that Commons only accepts "media that are explicitly freely licensed", which is not the case here. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
In addition, Authors' moral rights fall under Commons:Non-copyright restrictions which "do not affect copyright status and are distinct from copyright concerns." This means that the AAIC is entitled "to claim authorship of the work and to object to any [changes] to the said work", but the morals rights do not grant control over the copyright status of a file. Again, this falls back to Wikimedia Commons requiring media to be explicitly freely licensed (or in the public domain in the US and the country of origin). Unless someone can prove that the AAIC freely licensed their files, the nominated files are copyright violations. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 04:28, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Romain Minouche (talk · contribs)

Œuvres de Francis Benincà (https://www.francisbeninca.com/) une autorisation explicite de l'artiste est nécessaire voir Placer des images sous une licence : quand contacter VRT ? + selon les métadonnées, la photo File:Elévation.jpg a été prise par "MICHEL MENGUY", File:Ombelles 2.jpg et File:Ombelles 3.jpg par "Julien Mota", File:1000 Coquelicots.jpg par "Charles Crié" avec la condition "photo libre de droits pour la presse du 01/07/2020 au 01/11/2020, mention obligatoire: photo Charles Crié".

/ Copyrighted work by Francis Benincà (https://www.francisbeninca.com/) , artist's permission needed via COM:OTRS/COM:VRT. + for some images, the metadata part contains the name of the photograph.

Habertix (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Bonjour, tout est ok pour moi. Merci
Francis Benincà ~2026-45450-2 (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Maison Bulle.jpg

Copy of https://www.francisbeninca.com/portrait?lightbox=imagehmk (wait 1 or 2 seconds for image to appear). Habertix (talk) 19:51, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Bonjour, tout est ok pour moi. Merci
Francis Benincà ~2026-45450-2 (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
Bonjour, tout est ok pour moi. Merci
Francis Benincà ~2026-45450-2 (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Гаранин.jpg

Author is unknown, as well as the year of their death. It is also not {{PD-RU-exempt}}, as it is not an official document, but only a part of an investigation case. The first publication of this photograph was presumably in 2010. Event Horizon • Talk 19:59, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

An investigative file is an official document, isn't it? This issue has long been resolved positively on Wikimedia Commons. Hunu (talk) 21:02, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Not all official documents fall under the PD-RU-exempt category, but only those with direct legislative, administrative, or judicial effect. Investigative case materials may include such documents, typically orders issued by a representative of the investigative authority (on the initiation of a case, on the termination of a case, on the search for and detention of a suspect, etc.). A photo may be exempt from copyright protection if it is part of such a document. However, if a photo is simply attached to the case and/or cited outside the document, as the image in question, it is not covered by the PD-RU-exempt. Compare this to the effect of the PD-RU-exempt on portraits placed on postage stamps: a portrait is exempt from copyright protection while cited within the stamp, but if extracted from the stamp, the portrait is again considered protected by copyright.--Yellow Horror (talk) 12:01, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

File:John Babiiha.jpg

As Babiiha died in the 1980s, this could not have been own work produced in 2022 Bremps... 21:54, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:MattMurphyNYC.jpg

Old picture I uploaded some time ago Reverend Mick man34 (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  •  Keep Not valid reason. --RAN (talk) 02:59, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
  •  Speedy keep per COM:INUSE unless there's a copyright problem, which I'm afraid there may be. See "Source: Previously published: Facebook". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Mark v Eeuwen.jpg

Mark van Eeuwen cannot be the author if he is on the picture. Ennomien (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Robot cleaner, Morrisons, Pontefract (17th January 2026) 001.jpg

Because it is totally blurry Bixintxo (talk) 22:19, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

  • oppose - quality is sufficient Mtaylor848 (talk) 01:20, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
    Depends. Is there a similar better photo on Commons? Otherwise, I'd agree that it's blurry but usable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Bara'a Zama'reh.jpg

She is likely not the photographer, so VRT permission from said photographer would be needed. JayCubby (talk) 23:26, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Yessenov-university-21-1.jpg

No proof of free license on the Yessenov University website Nurken (talk) 23:37, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:500px photo (73130129).jpeg

Bad quality, it lack completely any information useful to be used in any project Ciaurlec (talk) 23:38, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Gun shooting NRA.webm

It is non educational ~2026-36758-6 (talk) 23:45, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep, the video has educational use for depicting a person shooting a revolver. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Mati Górecka.jpg

Przedstawiona osoba wycofała zgodę i zażądała usunięcia ze względów prywatności. 10:39, 17 January 2026 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KamilKrajnik (talk • contribs)

"The person shown withdrew consent and requested removal for privacy reasons."  Delete Unused; courtesy deletion is no problem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:57, 13 March 2026 (UTC)