Last modified on 28 May 2015, at 11:46

Commons talk:Deletion policy

DR closure wordingEdit

Currenlty, our policy says that "no user may close a Deletion Request which includes media they have uploaded". Because admins frequently delete their own DRed files and I don't see why "involved" users shouldn't close malformed or withdrawn DRs, I would like to replace this by "no user may close a deletion request as Kept which includes media they have uploaded". Objections or other suggestions?    FDMS  4    13:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

If a deletion is controversial, then it should be discussed, even if the uploader happens to be an admin and can delete their upload themselves. If the uploader were not an admin, then getting files speedily deleted without public discussion is and should be allowed, so long as there can be no reason to expect there would be later objections. Such speedy deletions may be down to simple errors, like uploading the wrong file or missing a copyright problem, or be more subtle such as ethical or identity issues which nobody would reasonably expect to have unnecessary attention drawn to in a deletion discussion. If an upload is recent, within days rather than weeks, then the uploader should be able to have action taken to protect their own interests if they have made a mistake.
However the procedure works, it is important that the official guideline Administrators is followed, including "administrators have no special editorial authority by virtue of their position". In this way, whatever applies to someone without access to deletion tools (such as myself) should apply to anyone with the tools. -- (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't thinking of speedy deletions, but a) regular deletion requests closed after 7 days as "deleted" by an admin who is also uploader of files in question and b) closes like this one, which I would like to be policy-compliant. Why did you remove the nbsps from my signature?    FDMS  4    14:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Maybe consider it as perfect housekeeping IAR, closing as "withdrawn by nominator" (where that's actually the case) can't cause harm no matter who uploaded the file. A real u+00A0 instead of   looks like some serious formatting error in the source editor.Be..anyone (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
IAR is not a reason not to change a policy, and I'm not suggesting adding a long criteria catalogue, only 2 words to clarify. That housekeeping actually made someone contact me offwiki, by the way.    FDMS  4    02:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

A novice of copyight-based deletions needs helpEdit

Hi, there is too many guidelines and I am confused about what is the best strategy. Could you give me an advise?

I found a file to be categorized and I started a discussion here about the model of the airplane. Another user realized that the image is clearly uploaded with an uncorrect licence. There are reasonable doubts that the photos uploaded by this one-time user are probably taken from the US Navy archive. The main proof is in the exit file: a digital camera model didn't exist in 1967.

Can I use directly template:Copyvio in this case?--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleting a previous versionEdit

Hi. I need some help please. Our organization were given rights on two images by a copyright holder and i uploaded them to commons. However the original copyright holders have requested that we replace the files with a lower resolution version. Out of respect to the copyright holders we wish to comply with the request and have uploaded a lower quality version. However the higher quality image still appears in image history on Commons. Can the previous version be deleted without having to delete the whole image? (which is in use in many articles)? Thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Return to the project page "Deletion policy".