Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests
File:Redacted hot air balloon festival.jpg: new section
← Older revision
Revision as of 01:43, 24 March 2013
Line 88:
Line 88:
*{{oppose}} UK images are under copyright for 70 years after the death of the photographer. The subject's death is irrelevant to the copyright, particularly since we know that this image is from 1916. Without further information, it will be at least thirty years until we can consider keeping this image. . Jim . . . . [[User:Jameslwoodward|(Jameslwoodward)]] ([[User talk:Jameslwoodward|talk to me]]) 21:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
*{{oppose}} UK images are under copyright for 70 years after the death of the photographer. The subject's death is irrelevant to the copyright, particularly since we know that this image is from 1916. Without further information, it will be at least thirty years until we can consider keeping this image. . Jim . . . . [[User:Jameslwoodward|(Jameslwoodward)]] ([[User talk:Jameslwoodward|talk to me]]) 21:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
== [[File:Redacted hot air balloon festival.jpg]] ==
+
+
This file was tagged for deletion for reasons not contemplated either in guidelines or Common´s deletion policy. The stated reason was [[COM:POINT|POINTy]], which is not a Common´s policy. [[COM:POINT|POINTy]] is an essay and therefore cannot be nor is it a reason for nomination, for it is not contemplated at the deletion policy page. #[[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:D]].
+
+
Another reason stated in the deletion request is that the upload was not done in good faith, a category also not found in the policy page, therefore it cannot be used for deletion. I request that the nominator [[User:elcobbola|'''Эlcobbola''']] [[User talk:elcobbola|talk]] sustantiate his accusation. Also, his qualifying legitimate words in a negative manner is not contemplated in policy nor a reason to delete.
+
+
I request that another affected file, File:The world according to wiki censors.jpg, be restored for it was unfairly associated with this out-of-policy nomination.
+
+
As for the closing argument, in line with Common´s stated policy found at [[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests#Appeal]] I request from closing administrator to state the reasons to close the argument withiin the stated Common´s policy.
+
+
I make this specific request considering that this nomination and deletion is at the center of a controversy that had me blocked in an unjust manner in my opinion and is part of a wider controversy.
+
+
Furthermore, the issue of censorship is a legitimate concern here and in every medium of cultural diffusion. Parody is a real and legitimate strategy to address social concernns such as censorship. To simply state "out of scope" or "no encyclopedic value" must be supported by arguments based on proven knowledge, proven academic reputation or any proven authority to declare outright what constitutes value and what not. Additionaly, the closing argument is in no way related to the reason nominating the image for deletion.
+
+
It is my opinion that administrator´s actions be done according to stated policy and not to personal opinions over fields of concern where they lack the required expertise to particpate in an informed and just manner.
+
+
--[[User:Tomascastelazo|Tomascastelazo]] ([[User talk:Tomascastelazo|talk]]) 01:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_5bc3f3_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.over-blog.com%2Ft%2Fcedistic%2Fcamera.png)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_49a920_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140511%2Fob_63b87d_carte-02.jpg)
