Commons:Deletion requests/File:Child blood type.png
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.
Missing licence for the background image. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:51, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin Considering that the uploader is offering posters for sale, I assume that the background image is the uploader’s own work.
- On the other hand, I just noticed that both this file and Icarus.png are claimed to be Own work by Pablo Carlos Budassi, despite being uploaded by different accounts. There’s nothing on their user pages that explains this. Brianjd (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- You assume that someone who’s main interest seems to be Astronomy had somehow access to a scanning electron microscope and to the necessary tools and techniques to create this image of congealed erythrocytes? I think not: I spent 7 years in the Lisbon University studying Biology and I can count by the fingers of one (human, non-polydactylous) hand the times I could have been remotely able to achieve something like this (and it was dust mites, too: blood is way harder to work with). Mask off the text and pass this to Tineye or Google Lens, and it will surely reveal a copyvio. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin No, I don’t think that assumption is credible anymore considering the apparent link between the two uploaders. Celestialobjects’ apparent record of copyright infringement and plagiarism doesn’t help, and Unmismoobjetivo’s self-promotion seems like a serious problem in itself. Brianjd (talk) 14:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete Seems to be derivative of an image from the Science Photo Library, used for instance on this Facebook profile (right click on the header image to see the complete version). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felix QW (talk • contribs) 2023-02-02T17:53:09 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin No, I don’t think that assumption is credible anymore considering the apparent link between the two uploaders. Celestialobjects’ apparent record of copyright infringement and plagiarism doesn’t help, and Unmismoobjetivo’s self-promotion seems like a serious problem in itself. Brianjd (talk) 14:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- You assume that someone who’s main interest seems to be Astronomy had somehow access to a scanning electron microscope and to the necessary tools and techniques to create this image of congealed erythrocytes? I think not: I spent 7 years in the Lisbon University studying Biology and I can count by the fingers of one (human, non-polydactylous) hand the times I could have been remotely able to achieve something like this (and it was dust mites, too: blood is way harder to work with). Mask off the text and pass this to Tineye or Google Lens, and it will surely reveal a copyvio. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
