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.
  • Add {{delete|reason=Fill in reason for deletion here!|subpage=All images from the Remote Sensing Tutorial from NASA Goddard Space Center|year=2024|month=June|day=23}} to the description page of each file.
  • Notify the uploader(s) with {{subst:idw||All images from the Remote Sensing Tutorial from NASA Goddard Space Center|plural}} ~~~~
  • Add {{Commons:Deletion requests/All images from the Remote Sensing Tutorial from NASA Goddard Space Center}} at the end of .

All images from the Remote Sensing Tutorial from NASA Goddard Space Center

Strike through = Original free source found

  • File:Air masses .svg this is not a trace of the below. World map from Commons with data (always free) laid over it.
  • File:HCMM.jpg This is a NASA satellite, source should be NASA or GSFC, but all I could find is this, where credit given is [GDK]. Anyone has an Idea what does that stand for?
  • File:Ikonos 2.jpg Pre-launch photo of commercial satellite, copyright probably owned by GeoEye Inc.
Permission policy for the observatory is here (not free). But there's a reasonable chance that this could be PD-old. Afterall the w:Lick Observatory was constructed in the 19th century. If only we could find out the date of the photo. -- Orionist ★ talk 20:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Sudbury Crater.jpg The source might be here. But there's no clear indication as to the copyright owner. Only "Aerial radar" is credited. It might still turn out to be NASA (they are designated distributors of NASA's images.)

All these files are tagged as PD-made by NASA, while the website of origin says that in most cases this is not the case. I have gone one by one doing a quick search in google to see if there were any indications that they were created by NASA and in all cases above there is none. I also found 6 other images that were actually made by NASA and changed their description, and I have 5 more that I have doubts (See here). A previous smaller similar request by me for two images from this website ended in the images being deleted, and there have been other images from this site which have been deleted in other requests by others.

From the previous deletion request: I have found the following notice in the overview of the full tutorial from where the image was taken (See here) :

I GET MANY REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION TO USE ILLUSTRATIONS FROM THE TUTORIAL, OR ACTUAL COPIES THEREOF. ABOUT 95% OF THOSE YOU SEE WERE EXTRACTED OFF THE INTERNET (AND I HAVE INEXACT RECORDS OF THEIR SOURCE); THE OTHER 5% CAME FROM MY PERSONAL COLLECTION WHICH I HAVE SINCE GIVEN AWAY. I AM THEREFORE UNABLE TO FILL ANY REQUESTS INCLUDING PERMISSIONS, SO PLEASE DON'T SEND ANY. and BECAUSE OF A MIX-UP IN RECORD KEEPING, MANY OF THE IMAGES, PHOTOS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TUTORIAL THAT ARE NOT IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN MAY NOT BE CREDITED, OR IF SO, ARE NOT PROPERLY CREDITED. IF YOU ARE THE SOURCE OF ANY SUCH ILLUSTRATIONS AND YOU WISH TO HAVE YOUR DESIRED CREDIT (NAME, ORGANIZATION, ETC.) APPLIED TO THE IMAGE(S), OR YOU CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE THE ILLUSTRATION(S) USED IN THIS TUTORIAL, PLEASE NOTIFY THE WRITER, NICHOLAS M. SHORT, AT THE EMAIL ADDRESS GIVEN NEAR THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. SEE ALSO THE WHAT'S NEW PAGE IN THE 'FRONT' FOLDER.So it is quite clear that it is most probably a copyright infringement (Originated by a copyright infringement by the authors of the tutorial).

On a side note, I would like to know if there is a way to blacklist this site so no more images are uploaded from http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov... 

--Garrondo (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete - what a job! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete, as per nom. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 What? I don't mean to sound rude (honest!), but it's no surprise this is barely getting any comment when you: a) didn't tag any of the files with {{Delete}} and b) didn't notify any of the uploaders. And even, in such large (and non-trivial) requests, you should put a note on relevant articles and Wikiprojects. If you don't, you're going to piss off so many people working on the multitude of articles and Wikipedias that use these files. Moreover, these are highly informative files (rather than decorative) and they are not easily replaceable, you should at least give editors the chance to find an alternative or upload to their local Wikipedia. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate you taking the initiative and collecting all suspect files and checking them one by one. It's only that more needed to be done.
Now while all these files are suspect, they are not blatant copyvios. Actually, the source of some of them is obvious: an accurate Mars Rover diagram? And in Polish, too, with no English equivalent? I just looked in its category, and found the English original which is taken from - where else - NASA. Another one is the Uranian schematic that highlights newly discovered rings and moons by Hubble Space Telescope. I just went to Hubblesite.org, searched the relevant words, and found the source. Seriously, how many possible sources could there be for a False color photos of Hellas Planitia (Martian feature)? You get the idea.
I've put a strike through on the files I have already sourced. I'll keep searching for more and try to find someone who can help in the process. Regards. -- Orionist ★ talk 10:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First of all thanks for the job of checking the images. I am actually not used to deletion requests (only small one before). I thought there was a bot for notifications (seems quite surprising that there is not). In addition I promise I tried to find the source of this images (And I changed the source of those I found). If any other real sources are found, as you have done, the best idea would be to change the description of the source since the Goddard tutorial is not a reliable one. I will try to add the notes to the images and uploaders but I do not find myself capable of notyfing every article using it, since there are probably thousands... If people gets pissed off, well, that is actually not my problem, but of those who do not check on their origin of their images.--Garrondo (talk) 08:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On airmasses.svg: I still think that to add the air masses over a commons map, with the same colors, patterns, and data, is a copyright vio.--Garrondo (talk) 09:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have added deletion templates to all the talk pages of the images. I will notify uploaders as soon as I can. I have also added some info on copyright I found when creating the deletion request for some of the images and was posted in the talk pages of the images.--Garrondo (talk) 09:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have notified uploaders of the images.--Garrondo (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The freely-licensed PDF produced by the CK-12 Foundation, a producer of free textbooks, that I used to find the sources of images and acquire the text used in a textbook at Wikibooks stated File:Major landforms.jpg and File:Features of continents.jpg were public domain and gave their sources as this website. I've had to do the same for images I've not uploaded, File:Example of a cold front.svg and File:Example of a warm front.svg which have been here since April 2008. I've now uploaded these locally because there are no equivalents at Commons in Category:Landforms, Category:Warm fronts, or Category:Cold fronts. This copyright paranoia is causing these highly informative files to be deleted. While I appreciate the heads-up, this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Please let me know if any of these four images are not deleted and I will delete the overrides. – Adrignola talk 15:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I echo Orionist's concerns. The deletion request was made incorrectly with uploaders not notified until very recently so any action should wait until sufficient time has been given to address concerns. I suggest editors are allowed to fully check over these files and either change source information for images clearly PD or upload images locally, those remaining can then be deleted. ChiZeroOne (talk) 18:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 CommentI think I've made local copies on en-WP of all the Salyut images, under the same names. Colds7ream (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 12:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]