Commons:Deletion requests/File:Naked woman wearing Converse sneakers (crotch shot).jpg

file:naked woman wearing Converse sneakers (crotch shot).jpg

Some concerns it may be depicting a child. Issac I Navarro (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

 Delete per nom; also exploitative, not independently in scope, and unclear if the subject consented to its release. Dronebogus (talk) 08:10, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

previous DRs of this file: COM:deletion requests/File:Me and my Chucks.jpg, COM:deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Peter Klashorst;

The closed COM:categories for discussion/2026/06/Category:Files with Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act warnings may be relevant regarding model releases and (lack of) recordkeeping, although the jurisdiction of the photo location isn't US. Arlo James Barnes 20:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't know if it was the right place. However, I did leave a message at the meta thread and pinged @PBradley-WMF.

Since this file was kept many times in the past for this same concern, I was unsure if I should bring the matter to COM:CSAM by sending an email to legal-reports@wikimedia.org. I would like more feedback if I should bring this matter to the village pump or elsewhere. Issac I Navarro (talk) 03:07, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

It seems unclear how anyone other than the person photographed could bring facts to the situation. The source was deleted and not archived, and there aren't obvious lines of inquiry since Klashorst died. Perhaps the precautionary principle (which as COM:PRP talks in terms of copyright) could be inferred to apply to personality rights in such a situation? On the other hand, there are potentially unverifiable aspects of many of our images of (probably) living people. Does the likelihood that the depicted may be a sex worker have direct bearing on the uncertainty around age and photo consent? The surroundings aren't visible, but from the context it's liable to be a place with default expectation of privacy. These questions would apply to other photos from this photographer as well. Arlo James Barnes 07:08, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Just delete all Klashorst’s racist, misogynistic, exploitative, pedophilic garbage. Exey Panteleev’s work is trashy and (in my opinion) out of scope, but I can just barely tolerate it on Commons because the women are clearly professional, adult models who consented to being photographed and having those photos released and were presumably fairly compensated for it. There is no excuse to host Klashorst‘s work because his subjects were quite possibly none of those things. Klashorst might not have been the first affluent white male artist who went to the Global South to sexually exploit the poor women and girls there as “artistic inspiration”, but he was certainly among the least important. Dronebogus (talk) 07:24, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

So Gauguin is on one side of the line, Klashorst on the other, and Panteleev straddling the line? The latter is undeniably using objectification as an artistic frame, or 'artistic' anyway, but perhaps more defensible than Gauguin albeit less famous. But all three have Wikipedia articles in at least one language edition, so what about INUSE (although this particular image is unused by Klashorst's article)? Mooted of course if Panteleev's or Klashorst's respective models are discovered to have been underage or unconsenting...but Gauguin gets a pass because it's in paint and old? And does your proposal contradict the idea you recently mentioned that creator intent shouldn't matter for evaluating educational value, admittedly a tertiary concern after personality rights and legality? Arlo James Barnes 08:37, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Gauguin gets a pass because he was one of the most important painters of the post-impressionist movement, not because his work is ethically okay by modern (or even contemporary) standards. That, and all his models are dead, and yes they also are not photographs. Dronebogus (talk) 13:09, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

 Weak delete I don't think we need this, and I agree with the conclusion of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ebony lady.jpg, this requires a model release. Abzeronow (talk) 04:46, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

•  Comment, I brought this matter to COM:VP#Files in Category:Photographs by Peter Klashorst.

Issac I Navarro (talk) 03:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

•  Keep per the more public VP discussion and the keep outcome 3 years ago at Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Peter Klashorst. --Fæ (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Admin please note, the previous deletion discussions have not been linked, this DR appears to be the 5th nomination:

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Me and my Chucks.jpg

The outcome after lengthy discussion was kept. --Fæ (talk) 09:40, 29 September 2026 (UTC)