Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch

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:Images by Marco Verch

Files by Marco Verch, used as an extorsion scam.

Yann (talk) 12:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and block uploader and Flickr accounts, uploader is using them to inappropriately pepper pages in multiple projects and is extorting money from mistaken reusers. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are more files that are derivatives of the images deleted first time round that show up in this search e.g. File:Happy_Nadacha_Mchelenje_(Marathon_Finale)_bei_den_IAAF_Leichtathletik-Weltmeisterschaften_2017_in_London_(36278103412)_(cropped).jpg. These should be included here as well. I'm not sure how to generate a list effectively. Smartse (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Serbari, to protect our reusers. We only accept photos under a free license, full stop. Licenses are one thing on Commons that is to be defended. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. Also consider instructing the bot to reject requests to review licences by this uploader so that more files aren't uploaded. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not for license reasons, but all of those pics are just stock pictures outside of COM:SCOPE, optimized for SEO, transferred from flickr, not used and most of them not useful for our projects. Most of them have no description. Some of them are duplicates, uploaded with a German and again with an English filename. --Stepro (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are two open DRs on this page. Please express your opinions on both. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 23:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The closing admin must obviously close both requests in the same way as anything else would be inconsistent, considering that there's no difference between the two requests. It's a bit confusing that the discussion is split into two different sections. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. --Geolina ^{mente et malleo} ✎ 17:00, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Question What kind of a scam exactly? Palosirkka (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:50, 28 March 2018 (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:Images by Marco Verch 2

As per previous nomination : Files by Marco Verch, used as an extorsion scam.

Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for both lists (and undelete those already deleted on this basis). There is no problem with these files' licenses. They are under perfectly free licenses. The licenses are apparently being very strictly enforced, but going down any route of "we only host files whose copyright holders are not too strict about enforcing their copyright" would be a very fundamental redefinition of what Commons does and does not host. We regularly (and rightly) keep hosting files whose copyright holder is no longer distributing them under a free license (e.g. changing the license on Flickr to "all rights reserved"). It is likely that many such copyright holders, since they no longer want their files to be reused, will also very strictly enforce their licenses. It's the whole point of accepting only irrevocable licenses that we don't care about how nice the copyright holder might (now or at a future point) want to be about enforcement. So either we should delete all of these files if we worry about copyright holders not being nice about enforcement, or we should keep these files too. Tokfo (talk) 20:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reasoning, but this is in no way a typical case, because it appears that the uploader explicitly uploaded the images here in order to encourage misuse of them by innocent parties, in order to extort money from them using their own website http://www.plaghunter.com/en/. The way that after being blocked, the user has seemingly paid editors to add photos to high-trafficked WP articles e.g. [1] [2] makes this especially clear. How can we stand by and let them use the project in this way? Smartse (talk) 21:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and block ~~uploader and~~ Flickr accounts, Flickr uploader is using them to inappropriately pepper pages in multiple projects and is extorting money from mistaken reusers. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 21:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. Also consider instructing the bot to reject requests to review licences by this uploader so that more files aren't uploaded. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect the project and to protect the reusers... see also: Category:Photographs by Marco Verch --1971markus (^{⇒ Laberkasten ...}) 17:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not for license reasons, but all of those pics are just stock pictures outside of COM:SCOPE, optimized for SEO, transferred from flickr, not used and most of them not useful for our projects. Most of them have no description. Some of them are duplicates, uploaded with a German and again with an English filename. --Stepro (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. Raymond 22:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are two open DRs on this page. Please express your opinions on both. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 23:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The closing admin must obviously close both requests in the same way as anything else would be inconsistent, considering that there's no difference between the two requests. It's a bit confusing that the discussion is split into two different sections. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to protect our reusers. --Geolina ^{mente et malleo} ✎ 16:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:51, 28 March 2018 (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:Images by Marco Verch 3

Same reason as the above RfD's + Commons:Deletion requests/Remaining files uploaded by Wuestenigel + Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedMarco Verch: indefblocked user, many copyvios, lots of out-of-scope stuff, and heavy misuse of Free licensing. This are the remaining search results for "Marco Verch" and (hopefully) the last portion of his uploads on Commons.

A.Savin 18:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, PRP. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 17:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:09, 14 April 2018 (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:Images by Marco Verch 4

Same reason as in the previous deletion requests for this Flickr account: indefblocked Commons user, notorious licence laundering and prone to copyright extortion. Flickr account is blacklisted at Commons:Questionable Flickr images.

De728631 (talk) 15:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I consider this a form of recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus as the community decided about all content from this author. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Speedy deleted per Alexis Jazz. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2018 (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:Images by Marco Verch 5

New Flickr account: https://www.flickr.com/people/160866001@N07.

Can also be speedied. I made a DR because it's a new account.

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 04:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and previous DRs above. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 11:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Abzeronow (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete should be deleted by speedy, his content is blocked indef by reasons --Stepro (talk) 16:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Alexis Jazz and Stepro: Which of the COM:CSD criteria would these files meet? — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 19:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: See the fourth DR, G4. But I already mentioned this DR on COM:AN#Another Marco Verch account. I think adding speedy tags only creates more work, not less. If you want this DR to be deleted faster, poke an admin. I don't oppose speedy closing of this DR, I created the DR because it's a new account and this allows us to keep track of the history. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:24, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Alexis Jazz: Your attempted ex post facto ping didn't notify me, did you use tildes? — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 19:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: I did. See. Timestamp was updated, I didn't update the time by hand. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:45, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Alexis Jazz: Thanks, you may want to use {{Pinging}} in a new post for that purpose. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 20:03, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

General reasons #4 + #10 --Stepro (talk) 20:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Stepro: G10 doesn't really apply. G10 would be for images that absolutely lack COM:EDUSE. But if something was created with a goal of promotion but it happens to have EDUSE, we'll keep it. Sometimes manufacturers of goods register here and upload properly licensed product photos. Promotion is likely also a goal of that, but it is educationally useful. So we keep it. G4 applies here though. The community already decided it doesn't want any work from this photographer. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:19, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
to be honest: This user is blocked indef because of his misuse of our project and sueing other users and reusers with high amounts just because of very little attribution faults. Do we really need to discuss, if his poisened pictures should be deleted asap or not? --Stepro (talk) 22:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Stepro: They should be deleted, and as far as I'm concerned an admin can close this speedy (admins can do that you know!). This DR is linked on COM:AN so there is nothing holding them back. My concern with your comment was the rationale. G10 does not apply to these files, G4 does. But adding speedy tags only creates more work. As I said, poke an admin (they already know because of COM:AN, but well) if you want this to be closed faster. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 22:07, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with you. --Stepro (talk) 14:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination -- Banned user. --A.Savin 16:01, 26 November 2018 (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:Images by Marco Verch 6

Only nominating so they can be deleted as "Per (link to this DR)". Speedy please. A.Savin?

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per nom & previous DRs Abzeronow (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 20:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But isn't there actually a possibility to prevent Marcho Verch's transfers in general for the future? Abuse filter or sth.? @Steinsplitter: Maybe you can help? --A.Savin 20:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: one of these was uploaded before the bad-author list was updated with his new Flickr account, the other was uploaded using UploadWizard with self-review which doesn't check the bad-author list. (another reason UploadWizard should insert {{Flickrreview}}) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 22:12, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: @Alexis Jazz: @Abzeronow: I don't upload images to WP (/Commons) often, but i don't get it. The images came with the proper license as far as i could tell. What did i do wrong? What does "link to this DR" mean? PizzaMan (talk) 22:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PizzaMan: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 68#Out of process deletion of files by User:Hystrix

Long story short, if you as much as misspell Marco Verch's name in the attribution, he'll threaten you with a lawsuit. Link to this DR (Deletion Request) is a link to the page you are reading right now. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 22:38, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But isn't the whole deal of CC licenses to be redistributed in a manner specified by the author? For all legal purposes these images are all irrevocably released under free licenses so why delete them? I don't want any re-users to ever be harmed by anything they wish to use from Wikimedia Commons, but can Marco actually win any lawsuit? You can't claim that the images you legally stated are free are suddenly unfree, is there any evidence that it was in fact the person of Marco Verch and not an impersonator making all these threats? I can see someone claiming to be a photographer and demanding money and then banning the photographer would ban an additional victim. I'm not advocating undeletion, but I don't see the benefit of deleting free educational content. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 22:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining, @Alexis Jazz: . Still sounds a bit odd to me that Flickr does allow his images to stay online, with open license, but a good faith usage of such a picture on this site would be met with legal action. I wonder: who would he sue? Me? Wikimedia? Did he ever actually sue someone? Under what law does he think he would stand a chance? Would he really risk having to pay the legal fees of Wikimedia as a defending party? Please understand that people put quite some effort into finding an acceptable picture and uploading it with all details filled in properly, which is cumbersome enough, and that it's quite disappointing to suddenly see it deleted even when you've done everything right. I feel WP/wikimedia editors should be protected from such disappointment. Me, I'll think twice before trying to cheer up a marginal WP entry with a picture again.PizzaMan (talk) 23:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Donald Trung: I don't really feel like going over all these discussions, much of which is in German.. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 23:17, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PizzaMan: if you had used Flickr2Commons you would have been warned. Marco Verch is really an exception. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 23:17, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PizzaMan: I just read these discussions and apparently in Germany and Austria you could threaten someone out of court with a kind of "cease and desist" scheme where a person has to pay around 400 (four-hundred) Euro's or be taken to court, German and Austrian copyright laws are crazy stupid and breed copyright trolls, this is really sad for the re-users, too many that we lost over 10.000 (ten-thousand) useful educational images simply because someone likes to abuse the law, maybe one day when the physical person behind Marco Verch dies ☠ we could see an undeletion request for those images but as long as this person keeps misusing the German legal system I don't see much chance at that. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well if that's the German law and discussions on the German site led to the conclusion that nothing can be done about it, i guess we'll have to accept this situation. At least now it's clear what's going on for anyone who lands on this page. I didn't use the flickr tool, because i didn't know of it's existence. Again i don't have experience. Next time, I'll just try to make a picture myself and hope that process goes smoother. And may i be struck with a horrible disease if i threat legal action against anyone who wants to reuse a picture i upload here, for something as trivial as a typo.PizzaMan (talk) 07:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 7

Another two.

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: can be speedied. This was the easiest way to explain the problem to the uploaders. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 14:20, 19 February 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 8

Files by Marco Verch, used as an extortion scam. Pinging @A.Savin.

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:55, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and the the above DRs. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 12:02, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please blacklist the name to prevent future uploads?--Roy17 (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Roy17: these files were uploaded manually. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:09, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AbuseFilter. Source code includes [Mm]arco [Vv]erch? Blocked.--Roy17 (talk) 14:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Roy17: AF won't be deployed for at most a couple of files a month. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ju Ta 17:33, 27 May 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 9

Boo

File:Kräcker.jpg

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about my upload, I did not know about it. Bencemac (talk) 15:29, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Velogorod Leihräder in Russland.jpg

I'm not quite understand this particular case. At the source page the author states:

The image Velogorod bikes in Russia by Marco Verch can under Creative Commons license be used.

The image itself is rather important for the w:ru:Система совместного использования велосипедов as it's the only free image found so far of the Velogorod bike sharing system in Saint-Petersburg, Russia.--Vаdiм (talk) 20:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vadim, our problem is not with this special image, but with the Flickr-user in general. So, per former community-decision it cannot stay on Commons. Feel free to upload it locally, if your project allows that. But, if you do, mark it clearly with "do not move to Commons". Otherwise, might File:Sezamki Halo.JPG be a suitable replacement? --Túrelio (talk) 07:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Túrelio: Probably not, because that shows a cracker instead of a bike. Neither were deleted. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 07:55, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination and based on former community-decision. --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 10

MarcoMarcoMarcoMarcoMarco

File:Wilson american football ball.jpg

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 07:59, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Speedied, as there are enough replacements: Category:Wilson American football balls. --Túrelio (talk) 08:08, 29 July 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 11

Our favorite greedy author has a new Flickr account!

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Speedy deleted for known reasons. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 15:33, 6 October 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 12

Missed one I guess. Thanks BevinKacon for alerting me. Pinging @Srittau.

File:Twitter Trends 2019, Bret Hart, April 7.jpg

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:07, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 22:53, 1 December 2019 (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:Images by Marco Verch 13

Adding these newly uploaded images to the list - from a blacklisted Flickr account. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with marco verch.

Ytoyoda (talk) 16:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the uploads, I didn't know about this situation. Should've paid attention to the blacklisted users list. Q-Wert-273 (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted by Pitke 2020-06-26 --Achim (talk) 20:49, 26 June 2020 (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:Images by Marco Verch 14

Files from a blacklisted Flickr user accused of copyright trolling. See other examples above.

Ytoyoda (talk) 14:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. I would support even speedy deletion for such cases. --Off-shell (talk) 16:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Community have decided to ban Marco Verch per this DR: Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with marco verch. --MGA73 (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per nom and the the above DRs. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 01:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted per previous DRs. I have placed Category:Images by Marco Verch as a subcategory for speedy deletion requests, hopefully there will be no need for further DRs on this matter. --Pitke (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Close again, page not archiving properly. --Minorax^talk 07:50, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch

Contents

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 2

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 3

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 4

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 5

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 6

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 7

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 8

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 9

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 10

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 11

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 12

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 13

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 14

Navigation menu

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 2

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 3

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 4

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 5

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 6

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 7

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 8

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 9

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 10

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 11

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 12

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 13

Files in Category:Images by Marco Verch 14

Navigation menu

Search