Commons:Deletion requests/2025/12/26

December 26

Files uploaded by Factchecker001 (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: these are AI-generated images. If these images were generated based on freely licensed photographs, please upload the originals.

Omphalographer (talk) 00:04, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Original photos uploaded as requested. Factchecker001 (talk) 23:23, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Cupboard work for home.jpg

The image is of low technical quality and lacks any educational or encyclopedic value. It depicts an unfinished, generic TV unit under construction in a private residence, which does not contribute to the mission of Wikimedia Commons. It is clearly out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 00:56, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. I think this is probably usable to illustrate something about home improvement. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:51, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
    Yeah, seems potentially usable but needs categories. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:16, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Henry Chung DeYoung in his student age.jpg

with no real provenance (Chung was born in 1890, and this photo was taken when he was a student in an American high school, but when did the picture become public?) we can't say for sure that its copyright has expired. Claims of provenance are garbage. DS (talk) 03:24, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Keep. Obviously taken in the US well before 1930 (probably 1910s). Given the composition and subject, this is almost certainly a yearbook photo from Nebraska State University or perhaps his high school (which would put it even earlier). Is this 100% certain? No. But the precautionary principle only applies if there is significant doubt on whether a file is free. There is no significant doubt here. IronGargoyle (talk) 07:43, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Delete. This photo most likely comes from the University of Southern California collection , which states Kearney High School in 1911. USC also states that this photo is "in copyright". They don't state that for all Henry DeYoung photos (some are "no known copyright"). For this photo it came with a postcard it looks more as a personal use rather than publication. Given what you argue I'm also inclined to agree with you to delete.
Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
My bad meant to respond to @DragonflySixtyseven Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 06:22, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

File:ACG Logo.jpg

No free license at source. Could be public domain if 1.) old enough or 2.) below the ToO of Greece. Abzeronow (talk) 04:00, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Keep If anything's below the TOO, this is. Definitely below the TOO for the United States and I don't see any evidence that Greece has a radically lower threshold. Phillipedison1891 (talk) 19:13, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:PM Narendra Modi and Royal Family of Bhutan on March 22. 2024 (53612143403).jpg

Flickr license was CC-BY-NC-ND, unsure whether {{GODL-India}} overrides the Flickr license or not A1Cafel (talk) 05:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I think it does. I have seen this with US military photos that are clearly free but the person administering the Flickr account goes with default (C) license. This may be the case here Gbawden (talk) 07:48, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Sonam Yangden Wangchuck (53612269394) (cropped).jpg

Flickr license was CC-BY-NC-ND, unsure whether {{GODL-India}} overrides the Flickr license or not A1Cafel (talk) 05:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:PM Narendra Modi and two Bhutanese princes on March 22. 2024 (53612269394).jpg

Flickr license was CC-BY-NC-ND, unsure whether {{GODL-India}} overrides the Flickr license or not A1Cafel (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Jigme Namgyel Wangchuck (53612269394) (cropped).jpg

Flickr license was CC-BY-NC-ND, unsure whether {{GODL-India}} overrides the Flickr license or not A1Cafel (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Jigme Ugyen Wangchuck (53612269394) (cropped).jpg

Flickr license was CC-BY-NC-ND, unsure whether {{GODL-India}} overrides the Flickr license or not A1Cafel (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Fuji-Junko-1.jpg

富司純子本人です　年齢的に昔すぎますため削除をお願いいたします 寺嶋事務所 (talk) 06:51, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Delete still copyrighted in the US due to URAA, as the photo was published in 1965. Yasu (talk) 14:56, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Pindad G2 Combat and Pindad G2 Elite.jpg

Taken from Pindad’s twitter account. Although Pindad is a state-owned company, it is a separate business entity and not considered part of the government, so {{PD-IDGov}} does not apply. Also there is watermark on image that states Property of PT Pindad (Persero) which further indicate that the image is not PD. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Pindad SPR-2 and SPR-3.jpg

Taken from Pindad’s twitter account. Although Pindad is a state-owned company, it is a separate business entity and not considered part of the government, so {{PD-IDGov}} does not apply. Also there is Pindad watermark on bottom right of image which indicates ownership of this image. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:31, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Ckfasdf, The main legal basis for BUMN is Law Number 19 of 2003 concerning State-Owned Enterprises, which regulates BUMN as a state-owned business entity, not a government agency, but its management power is held by the President as part of the state government. Thank you. A.C.O.M.S-2023 (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
@A.C.O.M.S-2023: Law No. 5 of 2014 on the State Civil Apparatus defines governement agency (instansi pemerintah) strictly as central and regional government bodies, including ministries, non ministerial agencies, and local governments. This definition is consistent with Presidential Regulation No. 29 of 2014, which limits governmemt agency to elements of government administration. BUMN are not included in either definition. Law No. 19 of 2003, as amended by Law No. 1 of 2025, explicitly defines BUMN as state owned business entities whose capital originates from separated state assets. Article 1.1 of that law states that the shareholder is the state, not the President. And article 1.25 mentioned that oversight functions are exercised through a holding operational company structure, rather than through direct governmental agency. Therefore, although BUMN, such as Pindad, are state owned, they are legally distinct from government agencies. Legal provisions that apply specifically to government and its agencies, including Article 43.b of the Copyright Law, do not extend to BUMN. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
@Ckfasdf: Thanks for the insight. Can we have a designated Legal & Compliance clearance about this, since the Law No. 5 of 2014 related to {{PD-IDGov}} is missing the Article 43.c and 43.d which is directly related to this?
Including a designated Legal & Compliance clearance about Law No.1 of 2025, which the clearance mentioned in its abstract that "The President as Head of Government holds the power to manage BUMN as part of the state government's power in the field of state financial management" ("Presiden selaku Kepala Pemerintahan memegang kekuasaan pengelolaan BUMN sebagai bagian dari kekuasaan pemerintahan negara dalam bidang pengelolaan keuangan negara")?
Thank you! A.C.O.M.S-2023 (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2025 (UTC)
@A.C.O.M.S-2023: Regarding missing clause of Law No. 28 of 2014 (Article 43.c & d) on {{PD-IDGov}}: These articles aren't about the status of government documents (PD-IDGov). They are 'fair use' exceptions, basically saying it's not infringement if you cite news as long as you credit the source (43.c) or use something for non-commercial purposes (43.d).
While the quote on abstract that you mentioned says the President manages BUMN as part of state financial power, the very next part of that statement is key: "kekayaan negara yang dipisahkan." * The Bottom Line: Because BUMN assets are legally separated (dipisahkan), BUMN is a separate legal entity/corporate body, not a direct part of the government administration. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Decimos Lotería de Navidad 2020.jpg

This file was initially tagged by MiguelAlanCS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Derivative work. The painting at top left is likely PD, but the lottery card as a whole looks copyrightable; unlikely uploader has authority to license as own work. Yann (talk) 07:56, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Kotra-Pharma-logo.png

This file was initially tagged by ~2025-42775-11 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyrighted logo. Corporate logo of Kotra Pharma (M) Sdn Bhd. Logos are not eligible for public domain in Malaysia, and no free license or permission provided. Source website does not release the logo under a free license. PD-textlogo? Yann (talk) 07:57, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Poker-tracker-logo.png

This file was initially tagged by Taichi as Fair use (fair use) and the most recent rationale was: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PokerTracker4logo.png - Possibly PD-shape, kicking to DR The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:25, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Seems like it would be PD almost anywhere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:24, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:UkamienowanieSzczepana.jpg

Potential copyright infringement. The author, painter Antoni Cygan, is still alive (born 1964). Abraham (talk) 09:59, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Obraz jest publicznie dostępny we wnętrzu kościoła, jakość reprodukcji uniemożliwia zarabianie na niej.
Do autora zostało wysłane zapytanie. Pborys (talk) 10:41, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Ks. proboszcz kościoła, będącego właścicielem obrazu obiecał ustosunkować się do sprawy w lutym. Pborys (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
Nie ustosunkował się - ponawiam zapytanie po raz trzeci. Pborys (talk) 09:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Nawrocenie-szawla.jpg

Potential copyright infringement. The author, painter Antoni Cygan, is still alive (born 1964). Abraham (talk) 10:00, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Obraz jest publicznie dostępny we wnętrzu kościoła, jakość reprodukcji uniemożliwia zarabianie na niej.
Do autora zostało wysłane zapytanie. Pborys (talk) 10:42, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Ks. proboszcz kościoła, będącego właścicielem obrazu obiecał ustosunkować się do sprawy w lutym. Pborys (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
Nie ustosunkował się - ponawiam zapytanie po raz trzeci. Pborys (talk) 09:36, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Torino scale-ru.svg

Russian Language is included in: "File:Torino scale multilingual.svg" WikiForMen (talk) 10:06, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:God zij met ons sur une pile de pièces de deux euros.jpg

The image is of poor technical quality, appearing extremely blurry and out of focus. It depicts the edge lettering "God zij met ons" on a stack of Dutch 2-euro coins, but the lack of clarity makes it unsuitable for encyclopedic use. Since there are already numerous high-quality macro photographs of this subject on Commons, this file is redundant and falls under COM:SCOPE. Kerem Sezen 10:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I will take another picture and try to have a better quality. Note that this is currently the only picture depicting God zij met ons on euro coins. The only other one is on Rijksdaalders ; they have been out of use since the introduction of the euro. Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 19:40, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
Hi @Sezenkerem: , is any one of those better ? c:File:God zij met ons sur une pile de pièces de deux euros (57708).jpg, c:File:God zij met ons sur une pile de pièces de deux euros (99797).jpg or c:File:God zij met ons sur une pile de pièces de deux euros (97383).jpg ? Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 13:22, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Hi Tpe.g5.stan, thank you for the clarification. You are correct that the high-quality macro shots I saw were of Rijksdaalders, and I appreciate you pointing out the distinction with the Euro coins.
However, I have reviewed the new files you uploaded (57708, 97383, 99797), and unfortunately, they still suffer from significant technical issues. The focus is quite soft, making the lettering difficult to read clearly. Kerem Sezen 12:56, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
Hi @Sezenkerem:  : I have taken another one, that time with flash on, and a white sheet of paper in the background (I am by any means not a good photographer) : c:File:God zij met ons sur une pile de deux euros nl.jpg. Is that any better ? How could I improve it ? Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
  •  Keep Oh come on! This is quite usable! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:7.5 cmyk.jpg

Unclear copyright status Fenikals (talk) 11:24, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Cover of a 1974 magazine from the United States. There were some "non-standard" copyright rules around this time in the US about having copyright notices and copyright renewals but I don't know the exact details of those rules. Someone else might chime in. Nakonana (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): was that your field of expertise? Nakonana (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
  • We need to see a scan of the publisher's info on page 1 or the inside cover, that is where we need to see a properly formatted copyright statement, or the absence of one to be eligible for {{PD-US-no notice}}. --RAN (talk) 20:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Ulotka wystawy Malarstwo Zbigniewa Bielewicza - grudzień 1988.jpg

Unclear copyright status Fenikals (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Painting by Category:Zbigniew Bielewicz (1913-2008). The text itself looks like a plain list of the tiles of his paintings, so should be {{PD-text}}. Nakonana (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion! I've updated the file description and license to {{PD-text}}. Hope that clears it up. Tabrus (talk) 13:19, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
You'll probably need to blur the depicted painting. Nakonana (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Lambretta motorren modelo gama.jpg

1987 poster. Cjp24 (talk) 12:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Chess on the road.jpg

the phographer wants no retribution, see http://taluda.openphoto.net/ + confusing statements about the licence, see https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/ + copyright claim Mateus2019 (talk) 13:39, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

@Mateus2019 The thing about the license is that this is just how OpenPhoto attributes their creators, see literally any other file from OpenPhoto that has been uploaded to Commons. Basically, OpenPhoto is saying that the creators are the ones who held the copyright at the time of creation who then themselves release it under a Creative Commons license upon publication.
Regarding the statement on retribution, that statement is fairly recent, added between 2018 and 2022, way after the upload of the file in 2008 (see: 2014 archive showing that Public Domain was listed there, it's worth noting that this is PDM and not CC0 because the latter wouldn't be approved for use until 2015.) I do not think in this case you can just revoke your creation from being in the public domain. TansoShoshen (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
@Mateus2019, you wrote "retribution." You are likely refering to the photographers mention of "redistribution." You are right, that was a typo. Imeant "redistribution", sry --Mateus2019 (talk) 11:04, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
 Keep I agree with @TansoShoshen that this photo was uploaded to the site with this CC license from 2008 (the same year as the photo's posting to this site) archived here:
The amateur photographers text comments did not change the license they agreed to use in 2008. The license is irrevocable.
-- Ooligan (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Chess on the road annotated (7x5 crop).jpg

the phographer wants no retribution, see http://taluda.openphoto.net/ + confusing statements about the licence, see https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/ + copyright claim Mateus2019 (talk) 13:40, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Text copied from Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chess on the road.jpg, which these should only be a single DR, not multiple.
@Mateus2019 The thing about the license is that this is just how OpenPhoto attributes their creators, see literally any other file from OpenPhoto that has been uploaded to Commons. Basically, OpenPhoto is saying that the creators are the ones who held the copyright at the time of creation who then themselves release it under a Creative Commons license upon publication.
Regarding the statement on retribution, that statement is fairly recent, added between 2018 and 2022, way after the upload of the file in 2008 (see: 2014 archive showing that Public Domain was listed there, it's worth noting that this is PDM and not CC0 because the latter wouldn't be approved for use until 2015.) I do not think in this case you can just revoke your creation from being in the public domain. TansoShoshen (talk) 17:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
@Mateus2019, you wrote "retribution." You are likely refering to the photographers mention of "redistribution."
 Keep I agree with @TansoShoshen that this photo was uploaded to the site with this CC license from 2008 (the same year as the photo's posting to this site) archived here:
The amateur photographers text comments did not change the license they agreed to use in 2008. The license is irrevocable.
-- Ooligan (talk) 19:38, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Ritratto del dott. Antonio De Palma (nov. 1918).jpg

This is not old enough to assume that the photographer died more than 79 years ago. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:24, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Keep: photo of Italian origin, so {{PD-Italy}} applies. – Howardcorn33 (💬) 15:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Many thanks Howardcorn33. I would explain the complete history: the drawing was created in 1918 by a frontline soldier-artist named Baggio. Given that the work is 107 years old and the author was already active as an adult in 1918, it is highly probable that the author has been deceased for more than 70 years. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, this falls under the PD-old-100 status. Even if considered an anonymous/minor work due to lack of biographical records, it is well past the 70-year protection period from creation. For the Italian Law the file uploaded is a scan of a 1918 photograph. Under Italian Copyright Law (Art. 87 and 92, L. 633/1941), a photograph that is a mere reproduction of an artwork without creative input is classified as a "simple photograph" (fotografia semplice). The protection for such images lasts only 20 years from production. Since this photo was taken in 1918, any related rights expired in 1938. I am going to update the licensing tag to PD-old-100 as it best represents the status of this century-old historical document. I am the physical owner and legal heir of the original drawing and the vintage photograph. Best regards, --Lapalmauz (talk) 23:30, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Jarman family crest.jpg

This file is a low-quality screenshot of a coat of arms from an external website/application, as evidenced by the large transparent logo in the center and the Google Translate icon in the corner. There is no evidence that the uploader holds the copyright to this artwork or that it is available under a free license. This appears to be a clear copyright violation (COM:COPY). Sezenkerem 14:28, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Freiburg Bauten 157 Ausschnitt.jpg

better version (and consistent named under File:Freiburg Bauten b 157.jpg Jenne1504 (talk) 14:30, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

No complains here, 'better version' is quite true. Go for it.... I can't really name any reason to keep this. Only page previously using this has already been updated (and rightfully so). --Gelegenheits-Wikipedianer (talk) 12:16, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Google One logo.jpg

This is the official logo of Google One, a proprietary service owned by Google LLC. The uploader does not hold the copyright to this corporate trademark. As it exceeds the threshold of originality and is a non-free logo, it cannot be hosted on Wikimedia Commons under a free license. Clear copyright violation (COM:COPY). Sezenkerem 14:35, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Comment. This is very likely below the threshold of originality in the US. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2026 (UTC)
    •  Keep Yeah, pretty obviously so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:27, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:GODFATHER.jpg

This is a personal photograph of two unidentified individuals in a residential street. It lacks any significant educational, informational, or encyclopedic value that would justify its inclusion in a media library. Wikimedia Commons is not a personal file storage or social media platform. The file is considered out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 14:36, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Comment In use in pnb Wikipedia. (I am illiterate in that language, but usage suggests it is in scope.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:15, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
    In fact, that article is about a movie called "Godfather" (see IMDB info). And the two persons (Doyal acharjee and SivaDebraj) depicted in the photo have nothing to do with that film; they are neither the director nor the cast. I suspect an ignorant Wikipedian simply used the wrong image. 0x0a (talk) 09:31, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
    I'd  Keep this as simply a pretty good portrait photo in a somewhat interesting urban setting, but I suspect the photo will be deleted as "personal" or whatever. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Wana sabo mashene roba roba da mutane.jpg

The image is a low-quality, poorly lit photograph of a common motorcycle. It lacks any significant educational or encyclopedic value and does not illustrate a specific subject in a way that contributes to the project's mission. Wikimedia Commons is not a personal file hosting service. Out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 14:46, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Dunno, it's kind of peculiar-looking. It might be miscategorized, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Wana wakena da a kecisa.jpg

The image is a low-quality, out-of-focus photograph of a pile of white beans. It lacks any significant educational or scientific value as a botanical or agricultural reference. Due to its poor technical quality and redundancy (better versions already exist on Commons), it is considered out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 14:47, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Usable but miscategorized. Does User:Yahaya alhaji umar always miscategorize? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
As far as I can see, yes. They consistently use only the 'Wiki for Minorities' category for their uploads, regardless of the actual content of the image. Sezenkerem (talk) 22:05, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Wana alalene da a keci.jpg

The image is a very low-quality, out-of-focus, and pixelated photograph of a food dish (Alale). It does not meet the technical standards of Wikimedia Commons for educational media. Due to its poor quality and lack of informational value compared to existing high-quality food photography on the platform, it is considered out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 14:48, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

How many other photos of this dish do we have? I'd keep it except that this is another small, miscategorized photo and I suspect @Yahaya alhaji umar of downloading photos from websites. Are you doing that, Yahaya? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Wana dila gojone.jpg

The image is a very low-quality, out-of-focus, and pixelated photograph of what appears to be textile or waste bales. It provides no significant educational or informational value and does not meet the technical standards required for hosting on Wikimedia Commons. Due to its poor quality and lack of encyclopedic context, it is considered out of project scope (COM:SCOPE). Sezenkerem 14:52, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, kind of unusable, or virtually so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Wanna nukileyane.jpg

Low-quality mobile screenshot of a missile launch. Redundant and lacks encyclopedic value. (COM:SCOPE) Sezenkerem 14:53, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Delete And seems to be a screenshot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Logo zootecnia.jpg

Copyrighted image. At the bottom of the page (https://abz.org.br/o-que-e-zootecnia/logotipo/) it says: "© 2025 Associação Brasileira de Zootecnistas" André Koehne (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  •  Comment. Brazil has a particularly high threshold of originality. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:21, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Martargp (talk · contribs)

Unused personal images of non-notable compositor. 362 followers on Instagram only.

George Chernilevsky talk 15:03, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Sctr oim polizas sctr consultarPoliza 2.png

worng image Brian.garcia.91 (talk) 15:42, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Sctr oim polizas sctr consultarPoliza 2.png

worng image Brian.garcia.91 (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Torino scale bigger es.png

Not used and language "es" is included in File:Torino scale multilingual.svg WikiForMen (talk) 16:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Torino scale-fr.png

Not used and language "fr" is included in File:Torino scale multilingual.svg WikiForMen (talk) 16:30, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:ITR 2307.jpg

Copyright violation. Uploader is the subject's grandson who clims the photo is his "own work" but this is clearly a professional University photo and the grandson would have been much too young to take this photo Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 16:43, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Please copy it over to English Wikipedia where it is used as a fair use photo for an article on the subject. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
Sounds like a good solution to me. Smallchief (talk) 21:38, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Torino scale hr.svg.png

Not used, not needed WikiForMen (talk) 17:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Torino scale hr.png

Not used, language "hr" is included in File:Torino scale multilingual.svg WikiForMen (talk) 17:06, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Anurag University "A BLOCK" image.jpg

Copyright violation: not the uploader’s own work I am the original photographer of this image. It was taken by me personally on my device. The uploader “Jayavardhan21” is not the author, and their claim of “Own work” is incorrect. I don't want the file deleted; I only request correction of authorship and proper credit. I can provide the original image file with metadata for verification. MiteshReddyPalla (talk) 17:13, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

@MiteshReddyPalla, thanks. That's generous of you. Please contact the COM:VRT. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:USSR Venera 9 1975 Venus ground colorized by Don P. Mitchell.png

This is not an image taken by Venera 9. It is an artistic interpretation of File:Foto de Venera 9.png with missing pieces filled in using cloning in Photoshop.

Ted Stryk used the images in the panorama to create this artistic view of what the scene would look like if one were standing on the surface. This view was created by rectifying the individual images in the panorama to show the surface at a more natural angle, sampling each image at different distances from the lander and using image data to fill any gaps remaining after this process. The objects in the image are real, though the arrangement is not.

Ted Stryk is a professor at Roane State and not employed by NASA. Don P. Mitchell, despite being listed as the author in the title had nothing to do with this image. The image is copyrighted and released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License, which is not compatible with Commons Licensing Policy. Nosferattus (talk) 17:24, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

yeah unlike other ted stryk images which dont pass the threshold of originality, this one does. Anonymsiy (talk) 07:42, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Estacion de Linares-Baeza, 2025 (07).jpg

too dark, replaced by File:Estacion de Linares-Baeza, 2025 (08).jpg, after upload — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:25, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Support It seems to be a reasonable proposal. CFA1877 (talk) 00:52, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:New Power Party logos

Complex logo exceeding COM:TOO Taiwan.

Wcam (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Christuskirche (Neuhausen-Gern) Innenraum.jpg

copyright violation: artist of stained glass windows died in 2001 (therefore his works public domain in 2071), no freedom of panorama Martin Sg. (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I object. The windows are only a small fraction of this photo and nowhere near the centre or focus of the image. As such, Commons:De minimis may apply here. wuppertaler Post um 20:37, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
  •  Delete I have to disagree because it's possible to zoom in and see the stained glass windows at a large size. If they are the only copyright problem, you could upload an edited version of the file with them blurred. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (most left) and Tun Dr Siti Hasmah (far right) sitting around the table with their classmates at King Edward VII College of Medicine, Singapore.jpg

This photograph depicts Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali during their student years at King Edward VII College of Medicine in Singapore. The file is currently claimed to be public domain under Singapore Copyright Act section 96 (published editions). However, section 96 applies only to the typographical arrangement of a published edition (such as an entire newspaper or periodical page), and does not apply to individual photographs reproduced or later extracted from such publications. This image is an independent photographic work taken by an unknown photographer and should therefore be treated as an artistic work / photograph. Under Singapore copyright law, photographs are protected for 70 years after the death of the author, and there is no evidence that this term has expired. Furthermore, at the time of United States copyright restoration under the URAA (1996 / 11 June 2004), the photograph was still under copyright in Singapore. As a result, copyright was restored in the United States. Since Wikimedia Commons requires works to be in the public domain both in the source country and in the United States, this file does not meet Commons licensing requirements. ~2025-43032-57 (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Speedy keep: the TA is a verified LTA; see local edits (accessible via the username in its signature) and CentralAuth. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:55, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
The Squirrel Conspiracy you may be interested Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:55, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Pulpit of Schlosskirche Meisenheim

copyright violation: artist of stained glass windows died in 2001 (therefore his works public domain in 2071), no freedom of panorama

Martin Sg. (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Comment I just uploaded a blurred version of File:Meisenheim Schlosskirche Kanzel.jpg. Is this sufficient?— Preceding unsigned comment added by TeKaBe (talk • contribs)
perfect, thanks! --Martin Sg. (talk) 10:58, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Files in Category:St. Stephan (Würzburg)

copyright violation: artist of sculpture (cruxifiction) died in 2001 (therefore his works public domain in 2071), no freedom of panorama

Martin Sg. (talk) 18:07, 26 December 2025 (UTC)


  • In my opinion, the cross is not the main subject of my image, but just happens to be in the choir that is generally shown. That being said, I am no expert on the maximum size a copyrighted element can cover of an image... --DXR (talk) 08:53, 29 December 2025 (UTC)
the de minimis rules in Germany are quite strict, so to say: for an object it has to be not recognised whether its put out of the image or not .... --Martin Sg. (talk) 11:32, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Shia militia fighting in southern outskirts of Aleppo (05).jpg

The Hezbollah flag is famously copyrighted, and the main subject of the image, failing Commons:De minimis. Chaotic Enby (talk) 18:33, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:2020 Delaware insurance commissioner election results map by county.svg

This file is a duplicate of File:2016 Delaware insurance commissioner election results map by county.svg. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 19:02, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:1964 Delaware lieutenant gubernatorial election results map by county.svg

This file is a duplicate of File:1940 United States Senate election in Delaware results map by county.svg. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 19:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:1956 Delaware lieutenant gubernatorial election results map by county.svg

This file is a duplicate of File:1934 United States Senate election in Delaware results map by county.svg. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 19:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Am Sklavenmarkt (1907).webm

Doubbled with https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Am_Sklavenmarkt_(1907)_-_Movie.webm - first upload with tool didnt worked correctly, Shark1989z (talk) 19:32, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Muehlenbeckia adpressa mobot31753002721329 0072.jpg

Es gibt eine höher aufgelöste Version des Scans hier: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Muehlenbeckia_adpressa_-_Curtis.jpg Cuello de pepino (talk) 19:54, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:1911 Maryland state comptroller election results map by county.svg

This file is a duplicate of File:1911 Maryland attorney general election results map by county.svg. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:1903 Maryland state comptroller election results map by county.svg

This file is a duplicate of File:1903 Maryland attorney general election results map by county.svg. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 20:54, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Triassic and Eocene.jpg

redundant - duplicate image Bioanthropologist1 (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Postage stamp featuring Bashar al-Assad, the newly elected President of Syria, 2000.jpg

This file was initially tagged by ~2025-43032-57 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: The work was published in 2000 and therefore was not in the public domain in its source country at the time of US copyright restoration (11 June 2004). As a result, copyright was restored in the United States under the URAA. Commons requires works to be public domain both in the source country and in the United States. This file does not meet that requirement. Converting to DR. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:58, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Noor solar complex Quarzazate.jpg

probably imagevio from https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/ouarzazate-noor-solar-complex-phase-i-ii-ii-iv-3000-ha-580-mw-2-4-billion-realized.1244819/page-32 — Draceane talkcontrib. 23:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

File:Фёдор Богданович фон Эльснер.jpg

The description states: "Permission is granted for non-commercial use of this image to illustrate Wikipedia articles." Incompatible with COM:L. Romano1981 (talk) 23:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

The depicted man (w:ru:Эльснер, Фёдор Богданович) died in 1832. Assuming that the original portrait was created while he was still alive would mean that this work is almost 200 years old and thus past any possible copyright protection durations. If the heirs of the depicted guy for some reason used a modern artwork for the biography book of him then the image would likely be out of project scope. But it seems silly to assume that the heirs would just use some random 20th/21st-century artwork for something like that because they probably have access to family archives. Nakonana (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

File:Ouazazat.JPG

no description, low resolution + underexposed; not clear what is depicted and how it could be connected to Ouarzazate — Draceane talkcontrib. 23:16, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

It's an upside-down statue of a Buddha in the Atlas Studios for the movie Kundun. Image needs a 180° rotation. See. Nakonana (talk) 23:46, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
See File:Film Kundun2.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 23:53, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
Image rotation completed. Nakonana (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
@Nakonana: Then, wouldn't it be violating FOP rules for Morocco? — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:05, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
Maybe? I'm not familiar with Morocco's FoP, but skimming through the text it looks like it is not compatible with Commons licensing. Nakonana (talk) 19:22, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Files in Category:Identity documents in the Epstein files

These passports are unlikely to be covered by {{PD-USGov}} {{PD-USGov-Congress}} so we have to figure out their correct license. As always, the burden of proof lies on the users who wish to keep the files to show that they are indeed under a free license

Trade (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

 Keep File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 037838 Redacted - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 056696 Redacted - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 056696 Redacted - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 065431 Redacted2 - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 073076 Redacted - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 073434 Redacted - Copy.jpg, File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 073446 Redacted - Copy.jpg per amended licensing sections on each of their pages, File:Jeffrey Epstein passport.jpg and File:Jeffrey Epstein passport (cropped).jpg per previous noms,  Delete all others. Based5290 (talk) 09:31, 28 December 2025 (UTC)
Looking at the text it's pretty obvious they are meant to protect legal documents and legislative acts by the government from copyright. It is not at all clear if they extend to identity documents as well. As for US passports there is still no clear consensus on Commons about that Trade (talk) 02:50, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
What do you mean there's no clear consensus about US passports? Everything on there besides the picture is clearly PD-USGov.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
I haven't been able to find any discussion where there was a clear consensus Trade (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Overall i feel we are relying too much on an layman's overly optimistic interpretation of legal text that is otherwise not really fitting the depicted subject Trade (talk) 03:17, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
I've become more open to User:Yann's argument that passport photographs are so limited by the rules of what can be accepted that US passport photos are below the threshold of originality. Passport photos would definitely be considered as simple photos in some European countries. Abzeronow (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
 Comment Beyond the goal of mirroring any content possible from the Epstein files, what is the educational value of the redacted passports/visas? They've all been redacted to the extent that nothing is visible beyond the issuing nation, and sometimes a gender marker - unless there's some additional publicly known context I'm not aware of, I'm not sure how we could even use these images. Omphalographer (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
File:Cc HOUSE OVERSIGHT 071956 Clean - Copy.jpg is not redacted. Nakonana (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 051522 Redacted - Copy.jpg is redacted but the image quality is still better than the the only other example we have of this document in Category:Visas of Morocco. Nakonana (talk) 19:54, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
The same can be said for File:D HOUSE OVERSIGHT 065430 Redacted - Copy.jpg (see Category:Identity cards of South Africa). Nakonana (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
 Delete As long as all those files indeed weren't made by the DOJ, just released by them CMBGAMER 2018 (talk) 15:48, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Simple photographs of documents that are in the public domain have no valid claims for new copyright, so it doesn't really matter who made the photos of those documents. Nakonana (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
 Keep those which are allowed as majority of the information is redacted so nothing private is shown, DELETE those which are not...--Stemoc 06:23, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
what Trade (talk) 21:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Anomalocaris103 (talk · contribs)

Média non libre :

Habertix (talk) 23:46, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello,
Thank you very much for the notification.
This file was uploaded exclusively to provide a facsimile source for a public-domain text by Joseph Bovet (d. 1951), in order to document the provenance of the text hosted on Wikisource.
If the journal issue as a whole does not meet the eligibility requirements for Wikimedia Commons, I fully understand and do not object to its deletion.
Kind regards,
Anomalocaris103 (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2025 (UTC)