Commons:Deletion requests/2026/01/30

January 30

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 in Category:Hatsune Miku

These photos contain a copyrighted character.

G I Chandor (talk) 03:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. Kept the cropped version of the last one.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:09, 26 March 2017 (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 in Category:Hatsune Miku

COM:DW of a copyrighted character en:Hatsune Miku. The Hatsune Miku's images have CC-BY-NC license . Wikimedia Commons does not accept noncommercial licenses.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 13:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 15:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Files in Category:Hatsune Miku

Derivative works of CC-BY-NC. ~2026-64846-7 (talk) 05:11, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

 Keep specifically File:エビチャーハン! (You’re Telling Me A SHRIMP Fried This Rice !) (feat. Hatsune Miku English).webm. The character design in this video is transformative enough to fall under COM:FANART and the creator of the Shrimp Miku fan character specifically released the design into the public domain. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 12:55, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
 Keep the following files:
 Delete the other files. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 13:33, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
 Comment Does the uncropped version of File:Akihiko Kondo and Miku.jpg fall under COM:FANART? It feels like the only thing that the design takes from the original Miku is the long blue ponytails; merely labeling it as Miku does not necessarily make it infringing. Based5290 (talk) 08:28, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
Even if we consider the Miku doll to be COM:FANART, the doll still falls under COM:TOYS, so we still need permission from the creator of the doll in order to keep the full image. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
Same opinion as Howardcorn33. 浅村しき (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Definitely not something i wanted to do right before going to bed but here we go, let me say what's fine and what's not. File:Akihiko Kondo and Miku.jpg is fine; Akihiko Kondo is clearly the focus of the image despite Miku's name being in the title, the Miku in the uncropped version to me looks more like a cosplay than a doll, which would be fine per COM:COSPLAY and the unrelated background character falls under de minimis. File:Balloon Modelling Hatsune Miku.jpg is fine per COM:FANART. File:CyberVocal Hatsune Miku Ver legs at BYOC Zone 20251116.jpg and File:ROG Strix Helios II Hatsune Miku Edition and CyberVocal Hatsune Miku Ver at BYOC Zone 20251116.jpg may appear to be cosplayers at first, but now I realize that it might be a copyrighted sculpture, so both files should be deleted. File:Ishibatake, Toyosato, Inukami District, Shiga Prefecture 529-1169, Japan - panoramio (1).jpg is fine per COM:FANART. File:SvgMiku3.svg could be fine per COM:FANART, but it needs to be debated on a little bit more. File:Tatuaje color jp.jpg is probably a copyrighted tattoo, so it should be deleted, but it's one of the only files that should be deleted that I'll bring up to prevent COM:FANART from being used to excuse it. File:Virtual singer.png is clearly a work of fanart, thereby passing COM:FANART. File:SAKURAKO draws a picture of Hatsune Miku on the Piapro Wall. - SNOWMIKU SKY TOWN. (51058695611).jpg and File:SAKURAKO draws a picture of Hatsune Miku on the Piapro Wall. - SNOWMIKU SKY TOWN. (51058782817).jpg are probably fine per COM:FANART. File:【Hatsune Miku English】 Glass Wall 【Original Vocaloid Song】.webm, once again, is probably fine per COM:FANART. The remaining videos could be easily converted to audio. The rest can be deleted. You're welcome 👍 AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 03:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Furthermore,
AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 03:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Regarding the toy, the "Shrimpley Lovely"/"Shrimpku" design (as it's officially named) was by a friend of Paige's who operates under the nom de plume ricedeity ("Rice" for short); looking at Rice's official website, the about section includes an email address that can be used for direct contact. Rice's site also includes an unliked page for the "Shrimpku" design, stating that it was originally made for an art contest. The page includes a series of very lenient usage guidelines, but they don't provide anything that would firmly clarify this particular case. Consequently, I think the best course of action is to just ask Rice directly via email. Game4brains (talk) 05:27, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
File:CyberVocal Hatsune Miku Ver legs at BYOC Zone 20251116.jpg and File:ROG Strix Helios II Hatsune Miku Edition and CyberVocal Hatsune Miku Ver at BYOC Zone 20251116.jpg seem to be authorized public depictions of the character. Depending on the country this event took place in, the files could be kept per freedom of panorama law.
Edit: The photos were taken in Taiwan. The COM:FOP Taiwan page is a bit confusing ("artistic works" is mentioned in both OK and Not OK), so I'll leave the question for someone more familiar to answer. Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 16:54, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
I’m going to vote  Keep all because there’s too many disparate items here. Re-nominate each one individually. Dronebogus (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Low-tech-infographic.jpg

No source for CC license. The source link redirects to Wikimedia page : circular citation. ~2026-60625-0 (talk) 10:38, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment - a file with the same name was uploaded in November 2021, then deleted by author request in April 2022 (immediately before the current version was uploaded). Can an admin report on how the file was attributed previous to its deletion? Omphalographer (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
Different source https://theconversation.com/low-technology-why-sustainability-doesnt-have-to-depend-on-high-tech-solutions-176611, same authors attributed. Abzeronow (talk) 03:06, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

File:Steady State Logo.png

This file was initially tagged by Alexis Jazz as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: logo of an organization, not own work Yann (talk) 16:19, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Claimed to be PD-textlogo. It may be depending on the country of origin. Yann (talk) 16:20, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
Yann, the uploader changed the author and license after I had tagged the file. Which is totally fine but explains my rationale. Usually I'd fix the license myself, but I have doubts this is under COM:TOO US.
According to w:en:Draft:The Steady State: "The Steady State is an American advocacy organization and think tank based in Washington, D.C." - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:31, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
  • @Alexis Jazz, why do you doubt it's under COM:TOO US? I don't think a generic ship's helm could be copyrighted. Ergo,  Keep. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
    • @Clindberg, what do you think? While it is true that helms tend to look alike, they can be drawn a few different ways, so there is some room for artistic creativity. I'm undecided and will defer to your opinion on this. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:05, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
      • I'm nervous as well. You'd have to show that particular drawing, with its particular curves and details, was a standard symbol, or at least a minor variation thereof. It's the only thing that could be copyrightable, but if that particular drawing of the wheel is distinct enough, it could have its own copyright. There are a number of small details on there. I do see some other drawings that are close, but there may be enough detail here to support its own copyright. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
        Based on the examples of uncopyrightable logos on COM:TOO US, you think that anything that's not a "standard symbol, or at least a minor variation thereof" is copyrightable? Can you sustain that view by demonstrating how the most complex public domain U.S. logo young enough to otherwise be copyrighted is simpler than this? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
        Ikan Kekek, the most complex ones there are probably Best Western, Nikken and American Made. The first two appear considerably simpler than the helm, American Made comes closer as the flag contains some details/curves but is probably still less complex than the helm, though not by an awful lot. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:40, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
        There's also File:Nikon Logo.svg, and I think this is more regular than File:Los Angeles Football Club.svg. I hope the closing admin is enough of an expert on U.S. copyright law to really know why this would be copyrightable, if it is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:31, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
        Ikan Kekek, those both appear to be more simple. For the LAFC logo, the letters are not eligible for copyright. So only the border and maybe a portion of the wing need to be considered. Seeing as the Cyberpunk 2077 logo isn't eligible for copyright the wing may not count at all, leaving just the simple border. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:30, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Reutlingen IT Kommunikation.jpg

Freigabe erforderlich, da jenseits der Schöpfungshöhe (Figur). Mateus2019 (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Was ist das Problem ? Das original ist "remix" und es wird darauf Bezug genommen (direkt im Bild + "Source") Dulliman (talk) 18:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Cormontreuil 75271.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 110-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:40, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay Heidsick 75291.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 110-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:41, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

See my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Baslieux les Fismes monument aux morts.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay ruines 75291.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:43, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay rue église 75278.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:44, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

See my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Baslieux les Fismes monument aux morts.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 11:13, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay popotte 75291.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay marché 75278.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

See my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Baslieux les Fismes monument aux morts.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 11:12, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Verzenay Mairie 75291.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Baslieux les Fismes monument aux morts.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). Not an obvious reason to delete a roughly 105-year-old postcard. Jmabel ! talk 19:47, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

How do you know it's 105 years old? Have you any author/source info? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:01, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
@Josve05a: The style. It could imaginably be as late as 1930 (96 years old) but virtually no one made postcards that looked like that any later: black-and-white, crappy halftoning, caption that was probably scrawled on the negative in black ink. Even in 1920 most postcards looked a lot better than that, but the inclusion of a World War I memorial means it can't be older. - Jmabel ! talk 02:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
The post stamps on some of the postcards in this nomination batch can be dated, for example, File:Verzenay rue église 75278.jpg has the w:fr:Semeuse camée post stamp which was introduced in 1906 and remained in circulation until 1941. File:Verzenay Heidsick 75291.jpg has the w:fr:Type Blanc post stamp which was in circulation from 1900 to 1932. Nakonana (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

File:"Зураачийн хөрөг".jpg

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as no source (No source since). I am broadening this to a DR of all works uploaded by this user. Jmabel ! talk 20:00, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Additional files:

All of these are claimed as "own work" and the uploader's account is claimed as author, but they do not look consistently to be the work of one artist. At the very least, VRT is in order.

All of the above necessarily casts doubt on the user's only other upload, File:С.Чимэддорж.png. It is unusual for a user's own photograph to be uploaded as a moderate-resolution PNG with no metadata. Appears at https://www.arty.mn/index.php?lan=eng&choose=item&id=2047&catid=21, but no way to know which came first. - Jmabel ! talk 20:08, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Potential heir uploading their father's/relative's work it seems. The uploaded paintings appear to be works by Surmaajavyn Chimeddorj, and the only photo also depicts Surmaajavyn Chimeddorj. The uploader's user name is Khaliun Chimeddorj. They seemingly share the same last name. The uploader cannot be Surmaajavyn Chimeddorj because Surmaajavyn Chimeddorj died in 2025 while the files were uploaded in 2026. Nakonana (talk) 21:26, 8 April 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.

File:Mary Kay Ash - 1974.jpg

Unusable photoshopped image. Compare with the original image: https://www.facebook.com/mkjgrizzel/posts/in-2001-mary-kay-ash-the-iconic-founder-of-mary-kay-cosmetics-died-on-november-2/564606612337446/ Johnj1995 (talk) 04:55, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Kept: COM:INUSE. --Abzeronow (talk) 02:49, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Mary Kay Ash - 1974.jpg

Not an image of Mary Kay Ash. Appears to have been photoshopped. Compare with the image used on the cover of Ash's autobiography: https://www.ebay.ca/itm/402620712534. No source given and no longer in use. Johnj1995 (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Bobobo Dance (21529728870) (2).jpg

Image is duplicate of File:Bobobo Dance (21529728870).jpg. A redirect is needed since both files are in-use on various wikis. BillHPike (talk) 22:12, 30 January 2026 (UTC)