Reason: [1] is a reliable review, but is the only one (notable author/reviewer, personal blog) and will definitely have opinions. Otherwise not notable. Previously listed for AFD in 2009 and kept as no consensus, the author also does not have a Wikipedia article.
Reason: Simple photograph copyright does not apply to artwork or illustrations, and the artist did not die before 1944. Should be converted to NFUR (have not checked the article itself to see if NFCC is applicable or not) or deleted.
Reason: The source is Facebook, claiming that the PD-Gov applies to official social media presences even when unstated, and claims of PD are false as archives of government site to 2019 point to copyright either way. I think an NFUR could be written for this image, within context to the rest of the article, but not certain. Either way, this licensing is incorrect.
Reason: Previously deleted in 2004, recreated and expanded, but still doesn't establish notability. Fails NBAND and GNG. Will note that [2] does not count as a source for establishing notability since it falls into the other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording exception.
Reason: Hinging on inappropriate BLP content, never will be a viable Wikipedia list article, editor has not edited since 2017 and a good deal of it is fancruft and unsourced with empty references.
Reason: Editor has not edited since 2012, but has made constructive edits elsewhere so U5 is not eligible. Stub article with little potential. (Will be nominating similar articles
Reason: No known date of publication, date, author, or good source; the source is a direct link to the image. Cannot be copied to commons due to missing/low-quality information and orphaned here.
Reason: Low quality; most likely will not be useful. It is out of copyright in Italy and the US, so it can go to Commons, but I do not believe it is terribly useful compared to other images within commons:Category:Temple of Hadrianus (Ephesus)
Reason: URAA restored copyright until 2033 as it was not out of copyright in the UK by 1996. Not used in any article so would be an orphaned non-free image.
Reason: Published after 1989, thus failing the "published without a copyright notice before 1 March 1989" required for the image to be PD-US as well. URAA has restored copyright for this image. Through Hirtle, I believe that since this was created in 1944/1945 that 120 years after creation would be the shorter term. This is not used in any articles and would thus be an orphaned non-free file.
Reason: Per it:File:Francobollo Carlo Gnocchi.jpg and c:COM:ITALY this is copyrighted in its home country and in the US. It needs an NFUR or potentially even deletion if it does not satisfy NFCC.
Reason: File was created in 1985, it automatically fails to be out of copyright by virtue of not being made before 1976. Not eligible under NFCC so should be deleted.
Reason: No author information, no date, no license can be evaluated as critical information is missing on this file. Does not have the requirements to meet NFCC sourcing or the ability to be moved to Commons.
Reason: Source gives no information about the file and doesn't even seem to have it within the page; no date of publication, no authorship, no reasonable assertion of public domain can be verified thus. Its only usage is dubiously related.
Reason: The source of the image provides very little description of the image itself; year of publication is not provided, neither is the year of creation. Both factors are required for the image to stand on Commons, even if it is out of copyright. There are other definitely-public domain images on Commons that can be used in place of this image.
Reason: No publication date can be found for this image; US copyright cannot be assessed and image is not suitable for Commons. This could possibly be converted to non-free content, but I am uncomfortable doing so with so little information.
Reason: Image is not found at source, copyright information like the creation and/or publication date are not given. Not suitable to be moved to Commons, does not have the necessary information to meet NFCC or prove that there is no active copyright.
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
