Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with insource:maxpixel

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.

Files found with Special:Search/insource:maxpixel

[edit]

See Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Images from MaxPixel.FreeGreatPicture.com for more information. There are all sourced to a third party domain that takes images from "free" image sites and uploads them to their site so people have to donate to use them. While some of these images are possibly licensed properly without the original URL we can't know for sure. That, and we really don't want to be advertising for people who take free images and then force people to pay for them to use them.

Majora (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • {{Vd}} per nom, prp.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC)\[reply]
  • I fixed File:Instagramwoman.jpg its pretty easy --E.3 (Talk to Dr Peter James Chisholm). I sometimes don't understand rules, and I think abstractly. [1] 15:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per nom. –Vami IV (talk) 15:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep? Maybe I'm missing something, but the only deletion rationale I'm seeing here is that verifying the source takes a pinch of ingenuity and a few extra clicks. It took about 45 seconds to verify that this image came from here and was uploaded before Pixabay changed their license. PCP does not mean that we delete a bunch of images because we can't be bothered to verify whether they're free or not.

    Whether consumers are poorly enough informed that they will pay for free media doesn't have anything to do with whether the images are free. There are probably lots of website that take images directly from here and try to trick people into paying for them. That doesn't mean we delete our content out of spite. If the content is CC0, then that means you can use it for any purpose, including the purpose of trying to trick people in to paying for something that is free. GMGtalk 15:39, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    This really wasn't out of spite and the insinuation that it is is a little surprising coming from you. I created this since the CfD mentioned in the rationale wanted to delete the images also. That would have been completely out of process so I did this to satisfy the people there. If the images proves to be ok so be it. But once problems with licensing is brought to light the proper thing to do is to have a discussion on whether the images should be kept or not. If it can't be proven that the images are under an acceptable license then the eventual end would be their deletion. If it can be proven then fixing them and striking them from this list above would be great. I've kept DRs open for months and months before while people work through lists of images. There is nothing wrong with doing so in my opinion. A DR is a discussion, nothing more. It doesn't have to end in their removal. The blacklisting of the site in question did have to be done since it wasn't the original site of any images which just causes issues. --Majora (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I wasn't insinuating that this DR in particular was started primarily out of spite. It was a comment on principle and not individuals. Specifically, whether others use free images for nefarious purposes off-wiki is not directly relevant to whether the images are in-scope and properly licensed, which are the only issues that are of any importance for Commons. GMGtalk 16:11, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, or least carefully filter the list. Just because an image was in Category:Images from MaxPixel.FreeGreatPicture.com doesn't mean its license is suspect or has not been examined. For example, take a look at File:Southern Alps in Winter.jpg. Epipelagic uploaded the file from Maxpixel, but then Achim55 then found the photograph on Pixabay. Speravir then verified the license. I've removed this image from the list.

There may be other such cases in the list. Until someone goes through the list and does a careful check, I would recommend Keeping the list. Once the list is filtered, I would support deletion. — hike395 (talk) 16:38, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I 2nd this. Edited & stroke File:Old-Knitting-Machine-Knitting-Machine-Close-up-Dial-1588882.jpg as being from Pixabay. --Achim (talk) 17:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I...can try to go through the list soon-ish. I can't today, and I really had at least a few things that would have otherwise been higher priority on my to-do list. But I can try to help out in a few days time. GMGtalk 17:30, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now all for all files another source has been found, in most, but not all cases from Pixabay. — Speravir – 02:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Thank you all for working through this list. It is appreciated. Now that they are all set there is no reason to keep this open. --Majora (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_found_with_insource:maxpixel&oldid=343808630"