Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Chu.JPG

ja Deletion requests --Jnn 05:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep No reason is shown by the requester in this request. Deletion request in Japanese Wikipedia does not mean anything until it is actually deleted. Even if it is deleted in jawp, some images can be kept onto Commons (typical examples are CreativeCommons images). Yassie 06:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep Strongly 1. Discussion on jawp is still proceeding and nothing is decided. 2. This image does not violate any laws of Japan. 3. Similar images exist on commons (cf. Image:Kiss.jpg, Image:You may now kiss the bride.jpg) and are used on many projects. There is no reason why only the requested image should be deleted. --端くれの錬金術師 06:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep Same as above. This image is not againt any law or Commons Licensing Policy.--Shata 17:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted by Zirland: In category Other speedy deletions; not edited for 0 days

Reopen following Commons:Undeletion requests, unclear on what grounds it was speedy deleted. / Fred J 15:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete No source information. The author is unknown. Additionaly, low quality. Tietew 05:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Delete Low quality, dubious condition of copyright and privacy right, and not usable for our projects. --Kinori 02:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC) It was deleted in ja.--Kinori 19:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment First, copyright status is clear. The original uploader says it is self-made, so it is self-made, unless true original author other than the uploader appears and/or the link to the original image is shown. Second, Commons is not jawp. Regardless it has been deleted in jawp or not, this image does not fall under any of Commons' Deletion Policy. It is obvious that nobody shall even try to delete images/files that does not fall under Deletion Policy of the project, even if it is deleted in other project(s). Yassie 03:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment "Copyright status is clear" is yassie's opinion. At least 4 users expressed suspicion in jawp. Japenese speakers recognize that the original contributer's comment lacks seriousness. '自分' is 'I' but rest characters are meaningless. We can't know if 'I' is the photographer or the object or both. It caused the suspicion about copyright. And under Japanese privacy precedents, this photo needs at least two persons' permissions but we only read contributer's '自分'. And others 6 (include me) said it is a mischief and/or not usable. Total votes are delete 10 vs keep 7 so it was deleted. Here commons Yassie uploaded for the purpose of escaping ja's deleting process. In this way he excessively complicated and prolonged the process. The original uploader in jawp contributed only one this image, and have never answered to any questions. He inserted it to two pages and left. One page was protected after many reverts. The other shows it still now, supported by minority opinion and IP's stubborn revert. I know Yassie holds very critical view to the policy and practice of Japanese Wikipedia. Though I don't dare to criticize his principle, I beg not to ignore other people's opinion. Obviously 'Not usable' and 'Low quality' are commons deleting policy. --Kinori 18:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment All the above is nothing but Kinori's opinion as well. In addition, Commons is not Japanese Wikipedia. Yassie 21:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentAll 6 voters here are known as Japanese wikipedians. And 5 except Tietew already voted in the jawp's deleting process. And Jnn, Tietew and I are sysops of Japanese Wikipedia. This is a deleting process of Commons but practically an extention of jawp's one at the same time. Jawp's stuffs recognize the difference between commons and wikipedia, so recommending to move to commons in some cases. But this case is not a divisoin of labor but an evasion from one project to another. I presented multiple reasons why this file should be deleted on our (commons) policy, and next explained the dicision of jawp community. Now I want to say that our difference becomes reason of cooperative action, not of rivality to embarass each other. --Kinori 02:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment So, who decides "not usable"? How about "low quality"? Source information? The original uploader says it is self-made, so it is self-made. All the reasons Kinori has presented are nothing but his/her opinion -- his/her POV -- rather than factual reasons. Again, Commons is not Japanese Wikipedia. This does not fall under any of Commons' deletion policy, so this image shall be kept on Commons. Period. Yassie 08:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep No reason to be deleted. And there's no persuading arguments in Wikipedia:削除依頼/画像:Chu.JPG, seems the admin just followed the majority rule without any idea.--Kareha 04:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep No reason to delete it. --TwoWings (jraf) * Wanna talk? ;-) 14:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep Nothing wrong. (IP addresses can vote, right?) 67.150.168.96 22:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not a vote. Anyone can argument for or against, but this is not a vote.

• Deleted. Many of those who speak Japanese have expressed their concern that the original uploader isn't the photographer. What is significant is that the image has the most typical telltales of a copyvio image: small size (but good quality), no EXIF data and the contributor can't or doesn't even try to explain where, why, and how they took the photo. Further still there are serious privacy issues. Samulili 05:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]