Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:FoP-Italy

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 in Category:FoP-Italy

Sorry, but these buildings are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).

The simpler choice. (Fop-Italy)

Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).

Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 16 February 2013 (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.

Files in Category:FoP-Italy

Derivative work per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Italy

ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 09:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I have no idea about FOP & all that - I just upload images and hope for the best really, Anyway my images (File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28358857313).jpg and File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28975386415).jpg) seemingly fail FOP so get rid of them, No idea about the other images so I'll leave that up to the deciding admin. –Davey2010^Talk 18:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete what? This mass deletion request is a whole non sense. There are pictures like this, this, this and others threw in with no apparent criterium. Plus the whole mass process involves photos not linked by any logical connection, it seems that the user has cherrypicked photos of Italy and proposed for the deletion. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 12:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Them all ?, Well I haven't looked at all the images which I thought I made clear above, I assumed these were all of the white building and all failed the fop, –Davey2010^Talk 13:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I had assumed the nominator had nominated the building in Rome (IE my 2 images above) - This list contains random images so therefore this should be speedy kept (Unfortunately I'm not using the best of laptops right now and simply trusted the nominator in this case), I've asked an admin to close this, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 22:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: almost a trolling request. Blackcat speedy kept some files. I deleted few photos of recent and innovative buildings from EXPO '15, but for artworks in the public space we should use {{Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer}} instead of signaling them as copyviol (even after few centuries from creation!). Ruthven (msg) 15:36, 20 April 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.

Files in Category:FoP-Italy

Modern architecture and works of art retain their copyright restrictions and there is no Freedom of Panorama in Italy.

Themightyquill (talk) 07:10, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: mainly kept, as these architectural works are not registered to the Ministry. Ruthven (msg) 12:08, 4 September 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.

Files in Category:FoP-Italy

Bridges, like other works, are subject to copyright restrictions. No Freedom of Panorama in Italy.

Keep Considering the composition of the image I think de minimis applies in this case. The bridge just occupies a small percentage of the entire area of the photograph.—Mariordo (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have trouble accepting that. It is clearly the subject of the image. The bridge is the title of the image, and the description of the image. The image is in Category:Ponte della Costituzione. The image is used in multiple wikipedia articles about the bridge. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vaporetto stop Piazzale Roma 07 2017 4228.jpg

Keep As already noted in the image De Minimis applies as nor the bridge or any building is shown in detail and cover only a small area of the entire image.Mariordo (talk) 15:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then I would suggest we crop out most or all of the bridge - then there's no issue, and it won't need to be in Category:Ponte della Costituzione. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Venecia 2.jpg

Themightyquill (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this bridge registered by the Ministry as a protected work? José Luiz ^disc 14:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

in the case of images showing the entire bridge the arquitect’s (Calatrava) has the copyright, so the copyvio applies unless an authorization from Calatrava is produced.Mariordo (talk) 15:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:FoP-Italy

Public art is subject to copyright restrictions like any other art. There is no Freedom of Panorama in Italy.

Themightyquill (talk) 14:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as already tagged in both images, de minimis applies. The area shown of the sculpture covers a relative small area of the entire image. See the examples of the Louvre Pyramid kept applying this criteria.—Mariordo (talk) 15:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

De minimis? The artwork is clearly the central subject of the image. It's in both titles. It's centred in both images. It's in the description of both images. And both images are in both Category:Lorenzo Quinn (the artist) and Category:57th Venice Biennale. The first image is specifically being used to illustrate en:Lorenzo Quinn on wikipedia. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:17, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Louvre Pyramid exemption applies only when a larger copyright-free work is being displayed in its entirety, and this cannot be accomplished without including something copyrighted. So if either of these images was showing the entire Palazzo Morosini Sagredo and so could not avoid including the artwork, de minimis might apply. But that's clearly not the case here. These are pictures of the artwork. If anything, the Palazzo is de miminis. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: kept the dm files cropped on). In any case, if the bridge is registered, it is covered by FOP, in case it isn't, FOP prevails. Ruthven (msg) 13:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]