Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Unused personal files

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

Extended content

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
  •  Keep any images listed here uploaded by me. This bot mass deletion based on a category makes proper review unnecessarily complex, and is a way of bypassing the normal DR process. -- (talk) 05:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Betty Ages photo. It's worrying that crosswiki photos like this are being unthinkingly deleted out of process. Please stop creating these crazy large automatic DRs for potentially controversial in scope images. -- (talk) 05:37, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Files which are in use on other projects must not be deleted, please remove from this DR before considering any action. An example is the photograph of Arnab Roy Chowdhury. This DR is obviously hastily prepared using automation rather than actually looking at the images nominated. -- (talk) 10:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: You really want to create dozens of thousands single DRs for all personal files, hosted on Commons? /St1995 21:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Before talking about the number of DRs, you should check if there is really a need for a deletion. Then, some of these may not be in scope, but that has to be decided on individual basis. A mass DR of hundreds of images is not the right way to do it. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:47, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep The files, as this automatic and massive DR of files of different authors, provinances, scopes (or lack of) and sources is itself out of scope. So  Delete this category as out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private playground of someone, wasting other peoples time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tm (talk • contribs)
  • The problem is not in this category. @Apocheir: Please do not add files in this category which may be notable for Commons. This cat is only for personal files! /St1995 21:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Can someone enlighten me what is a Unused personal file, as i tought it was about out pf scope images of people, but it seems that it includes images of cars, logos (and several others logos by the way). Tm (talk) 18:21, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Speaking as someone who's been adding a lot of files to this category lately... My conception of "personal file" includes not just pictures of the users, but pictures of the user's friends and family, promotional material for the user's musical projects, logos of the user's personal business, or anything else that is really only of interest to the uploader. Basically anything where someone's trying to use Commons as their own personal photo hosting site. There was no definition of "personal file" on the category, so it's up to individual interpretation. That said, as I stated on the Talk page, I was under the impression that there would be some sort of automated review before those files were nominated for deletion. At the very least, someone needs to clean out the files that are in use! -Apocheir (talk) 22:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep all, for now, and created separate DRs for individual files or groups thereof, based on some actual work. And, per Tm,  delete this useless and nonsensical category. It may be necessary to discuss long to reach an understanding of what a “personal image” is: One’s gut feeling is not enough. -- Tuválkin 21:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I think there is nothing wrong with the category in and of itself, but I would ask that someone please delete two files that I uploaded with regards to Alessandro Safina and Laura Maria Calefeteanu. I am very new here and did not read the policy on public domain photos closely enough. Thank you for bringing this issue to my attention. GrammerCracker96 (talk) 12:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment While this discussion is continuing (?) here, the DR template has been removed from the relevant page. If a majority is against these mass deletions, simply close this discussion so we can DR the files (those which are here I mean) individually or for uploader. In this situation the process is stalled and that is not correct. --E4024 (talk) 14:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination - note that there are a significant number of copyvios (more than 1/3)- a few are kept (from user who made a few useful contributions, or image in scope). --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Out of scope. Personal images that are of no educational use.

 Keep I think this fits fine under Category:Holi in the United States and other categories. It doesn't need to be a personal file. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep This has been cropped so that it's just an image of the sign, not a personal image. In scope. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 03:54, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: deleted most per nomination, kept a few which are in use/could be potentially used. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 18:44, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]