Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 August 8

< August 7	August 9 >

August 8[edit]

File:The Longe Arms, Spixworth.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused local version of File:The Longe Arms Spixworth (geograph 3042245).jpg. File size different for some reason. Kelly ^hi! 07:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dharti Bhatt.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Attributed to a source/author neither of whom is the uploader. Also I fail to see how a photo is ineligible Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:51, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Orthodoxcross.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F2 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be an SVG file with an issue as I'm seeing an entirely black rectangle Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sfan00 IMG: This seems more like a question for WP:VPT than FFD. Or rather, I'd ask on VPT first. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Lagandunmurry.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused file, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 08:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't this be put on Commons? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved this to Commons. Please speedy delete. Reh man 14:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:EspanRegalRecord.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep under non-free use. No credible rationale for public domain usage has been advanced. There appears to be no reason to believe this originated before 1923, and it clearly passes the threshold of originality. "Artistic merit" is not considered when determining whether something is copyrightable. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 05:32, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At some point , I considered this PD, FFD because it was later changed to non-free by another contributor. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing clear evidence that this disk was published before 1923 and the article title alone is not enough. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As a collector of 78rpm records for decades, I have NEVER seen a copyright issue come up on record labels themselves. There is no individual artistic merit to them, they are used to impart information regarding the selection. Almost every issue from this label, from this time period, constituting 100s of separate issues, would use this exact label design. Such images are very important to collectors such as myself, as they help identify the subject. I don't know the exact date of the label (knowing much less about European pressings than US ones), but I estimate this label to date from 1926-1930. It must be after 1925 because of the term "Viva-tonal". I seriously, seriously doubt this is copyrightable, but even if it is the image should be kept because it is important to the identification of the subject. This is not media, and is an incorrect rationale. In this case the media is in the record grooves. If the record had an individual jacket with artistic merit, then this would be media, but it's not. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:42, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that the copyright for this recording has long expired in the European Union. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dunmurry on map2.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused jpg locator map. Kelly ^hi! 08:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Plano Public School Auditorium 1938.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus on copyright status. Keeping under non-free use for now. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith here, bbut wouldn't a 1938 image have to have had a notice in the US? FFD referal as subject to some checks this image might be no-notice / not renewed based on the date. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, but the image seems to be a cropped scan. The cropped part may include a copyright notice. Does someone here have access to the collection this is sourced to. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:11, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hope-peruna.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense to PD-US-not renewed Majora (talk) 00:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image dates from 1935, Wouldn't the source publication have had to be renewed for this to still be in copyright and thus under 'non-free' rules? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given the statements that this was only found via digging in old forgotten yearbooks, I think a renewal is unlikely. I would support considering this as public domain given that we have no evidence of renewal and it seems implausible. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Route 45 in Pound Green.jpeg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, redundant to File:Route 45 from Pound Green.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 09:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly the same, this can probably be moved to Commons. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I have moved to Commons. Reh man 14:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Aranetacoliseum logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense as {{PD-logo}} ★ Bigr Tex 22:29, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added an FUR for this a few year ago in good faith, but taking a second look, I'm not now so sure it needs one as the logo may fall below threshold of originality, as it 2 simple geometric elements and text. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, this much simpler than many of the things listed at commons:COM:TOO#United States. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:14, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons? Reh man 14:09, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Motspur Park Station.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, blurry. We have clearer images at Commons:Category:Motspur Park railway station. Kelly ^hi! 09:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Chinese State Circus London 2007.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Consensus that this doesn't fall under FoP in the UK, so the licensing is incorrect. Further, the Chinese State Circus is touring as of 2016, so this isn't irreplaceable. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As primarily derivative of a 2D work, may not fall under freedom of panorama rules in the UK. Kelly ^hi! 09:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, may be usable as fair use though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Achannelnew.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense as {{PD-logo}} ★ Bigr Tex 22:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not so sure this needs an NFUR as I am seeing a rather simple logo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BM Location.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused png locator map. Kelly ^hi! 11:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Location Broughton Moor.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused png locator map. Kelly ^hi! 11:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Cbeairport3.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2 authors, Who actually took the photo? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The second file is a simple crop of the first, so keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:18, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons. Reh man 14:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that User:Sriniucan claimed that they owned the work when they uploaded it, then User:Sfan00 IMG came and added an information block that pointed out that there was missing information, then User:Beao took off the timestamp, and finally the original uploader came back and tried to deal with the lack of source information that had been pointed out and didn't know how to deal with ownership after the modification of their photo, so attributed it first to themself and then to the modifier. ★ Bigr Tex 21:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Slags.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused user profile photo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:YoonByung-InWithStudents.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relisted on Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 November 30#File:YoonByung-InWithStudents.jpg}}

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Mannchalay3.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep as non-free ★ Bigr Tex 22:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing much more than simple text here. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That "little much more" with glow effects bother me. May be above TOO. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:21, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Daphne's picture.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic and unused. Senator2029 “Talk” 12:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Alexander dennis logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense as {{PD-ineligible-USOnly}} Majora (talk) 04:57, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying is these needs to 'non-free' as the equivalent at commons was considered to be below TOO and tagged as simple. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's a British logo, a country with a much lower TOO. So I am very dubious about the Commons license. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:23, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to PD-ineligible-USOnly and nominated the logo for deletion on Commons. Closing. --Majora (talk) 04:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:AltaVista Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is 'non-free' when the Commons equivalent was felt to be below TOO and tagged accordingly. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, are the upper symbols supposed to be letters? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think this barely passes the threshold of originality. The logo is meant to be a lowercase "a" and "v", with the left side of the "v" acting as part of the "a". The combination of the two letters in this looping style of script is sufficient to differentiate this from typeface, and this can't be described as simple geometric shapes. There's some creativity here. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BU Rob13: This is a textlogo. It is a US company and the US has a much higher TOO than that. Even if it was a font, no font is copyrighted in the US. The Commons one is fine and this can be deleted as F8. --Majora (talk) 00:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Altadis.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus to change this to PD as failing to pass the threshold of originality. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Queyring why this is 'non-free' when the commons equivalent was felt to be below TOO and tagged accordingly, Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because we don't know whether the Commons license tag is correct, seeing as it seem to be a French/Spanish work. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Google view of Aremallapur.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Google Maps satellite imagery is copyrighted. Senator2029 “Talk” 13:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Sopita Tanasan.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That it's a wikipedia screenshot is not sufficient, What's the original source, and where's the evidence of the CC-BY-SA license? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Flame ThaiNATGames.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: tagged as needing permission ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source on Thai (?) Wikipedia, Attributes what Google Translate rendered as "Cage Press" which has no obvious connection with either rhe uploader there or locally. Does anyone following FFD speak Thai(/) to resolve this? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a YouTube channel, the Thai file is licensed as PD-self. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Gene location.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep Majora (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever license this should be, it's not a Wikipedia-screnshot. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it's derived from File:Chromosome1.PNG with an increase in size. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed on the file page. Closing. --Majora (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Joelma August 2016.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Previously published at -http://natelinha.uol.com.br/celebridades/2016/08/04/joelma-surpreende-e-encanta-fas-com-rosto-rejuvenescido-101109.php. Clarification or OTRS needed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Phil Elmore.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader is not the credited author, There is a claim of permission in an earlier edit summary, Referral to FFD as owing to the age of the image F11 doesn't auto apply. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Strings amdocs.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep Nthep (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An image file with 2 licenses in it's history, the first of which is less restrictive. I am assumign in good faith that the more recent one is correct, but.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Call me dense, but why does the difference matter? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The difference matters because if it's actually PD, it would need a different tag at Commons. Commons doesn't like ambiguity.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:35, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stick with the more restrictive license then, I'd say. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dracula's Daughter patrons.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mismatch between credited photographer and uploader name. Clarification required. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:HarrisMuseumPreston.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, blurry. We have clearer images at Commons:Category:Harris Museum and Art Gallery. Kelly ^hi! 16:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Route 225.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Primarily derivative of a 2D graphic work and thus probably not covered by UK freedom of panorama. Kelly ^hi! 16:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Amd-k6-3.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Equivalent at commons was considered 'simple' and tagged accordingly. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:American Friends Service Committee logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying on the bases that the equivalent file at Commons, was considered to be below threshold of originality and tagged as simple. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Americanah (Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie novel).jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Book cover is below threshold of originality I think. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the book cover itself is ineligible for copyright, but is the photograph eligible as a picture of a 3D object? I'd be inclined to argue that the 3D portion is de minimis, as the real focus is the 2D content. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:32, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be thorough, this is a Nigerian work. So their copyright would apply here. Per, their copyright law there has to be sufficient effort for a work to gain copyright. So no sweat of the brow law to worry about here. The cover is definitely PD. So all we have to worry about here is the 3D nature of the image. There are alternatives out there that just have the flat cover. So in light of that I'm just going to upload one of those to Commons and we can get rid of this one. Problem solved. --Majora (talk) 02:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. This can now be deleted as replaced. --Majora (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:América de Natal logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo may possibly fall below threshold of originality. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that it falls below TOO and relicence as {{PD-logo}}. ★ Bigr Tex 22:40, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Android-x86.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This logo is apparently under an Apache style license on Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ankai logo.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This logo may lie below threshold of originality as I'm only seeing simple text and border.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:10, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Aphex Twin - minipops 67.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying if this needs an NFUR, given that the Commons equivalent was considered 'simple'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me as if it would not exceed TOO in the United States. ★ Bigr Tex 22:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Aries Trikala B.C. Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Equivalent file at Commons was felt to fall below threshold of originality and is tagged as simple. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ariolasoft.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commons equivalent, was considered to lie below threshold of originality and is tagged as 'simple'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Asia Motors Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying if this needs to be 'non-free' as it's simple text and an enclosing ellipse. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Australian Football League.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is under 'non-free' , when the equivalent file at Commons is tagged under a 'simple' license? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File of the same name was deleted at C:COM:Deletion requests/File:Australian Football League.svg. I can't look at it to tell if it was indeed the same image and the one nom is talking about. —Cryptic 03:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Avon Rubber logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This logo may fall below threshold of originality as it only text and one gemmoetric element. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Underground train 1970s.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file, unidentified subject. Kelly ^hi! 17:47, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added a description. Can't be certain what stock this is without asking a tube nerd. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:ETS-Prun-g.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F9 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC) Copyvio Staszek Lem (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BHS-cover.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: use under PD-text ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying as this is purely text cover. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Baloise Holding Logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying as Commons equivalent has a 'simple' tag. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bavarian State Orchestra Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it is a purely text logo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Beerse Statue Paul Janssen 070225.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Belgium now has FoP, and there is an equivalent to this file at Commons under a 'free license'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Belgium supporters' club 1895.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. The license on Commons specifically disallows commercial use, so I've nominated it for deletion there. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:49, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying on the grounds that the same logo is on Commons under a 'free' license. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Berger (Politiker) Litho.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by BU Rob13 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quyering why this is non-free given the dates for Eduard Kaiser (1820–1895), given on the Commons equivalent. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you propose instead? Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:07, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it's free then the local copy is a duplciate of Commons (and F8) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:09, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Besa Kavajë Club Logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. Nominated for deletion on Commons as incorrectly licensed. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying as apparently this on Commons under a 'free' license. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bigc logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is 'non-free' as it's a mostly text logo? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Biltema logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying on the basis that this logo may fall below threshold or originality ( Text + simple checkerboard) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BioRegional logo strapline.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Miniapolis (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is 'non-free' as it appears to be below threshold of originality as simple text/ geometric element. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Blackboad pattern system structure.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am failing to see why this is under a non-free license when the equivalent at Commons is under a free one. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Blink Entertainment Official Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this 'non-free' given that it's a purely textual logo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It can probably be deleted as a duplicate of c:File:Blink Entertainment.png. – nyuszika7h (talk) 19:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bora-Argon 18 Logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this logo is non-free given that the Commons equivalent is under a 'free license' ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can see no evidence of the CC0 license, the site only says "© BORA - ARGON 18", but it may fall below the threshold of originality. nyuszika7h (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Upload credit should go to User:BaldBoris and the version I uploaded has since been deleted. Being a German team though logo may likely qualify to be uploaded to Commons under the pd-logo as the countries threshold of originality seems pretty low, [1]. If no one opposes I will change the licensing on Commons, leaving the Wikipedia version to be deleted. Salavat (talk) 00:17, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing status has been changed to PD-logo. Image should now be deleted as it is available on Commons. Discussion can also now be closed. Salavat (talk) 04:54, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Borussia dortmund logo 1.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it's a very simple text logo plus circular enclosure? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing status has been changed to PD-logo. Image should now be deleted as it is available on Commons. Discussion can also now be closed. Salavat (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Borussia dortmund logo 2.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it's a simple text logo + enclosures. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing status has been changed to PD-logo. Image should now be deleted as it is available on Commons. Discussion can also now be closed. Salavat (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Borussia dortmund logo 3.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it's a simple text logo+bordered enclosure. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing status has been changed to PD-logo. Image should now be deleted as it is available on Commons. Discussion can also now be closed. Salavat (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Cinelicious Sign Hollywood.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Contains non-free logo and current usage isn't supported by non-free use criteria. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying on the basis that this includes a third party logo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does not seem like an appropriate use of the image either, it's used as the infobox image in a BLP article (though it does not depict the person). nyuszika7h (talk) 19:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would be happy if it was with the company "Cinelicious"? Telecine Guy 19:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It may meet 'non-free' use criteria for the infobox there. possibly. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bicycle2010.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep czar 06:12, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused bicycle picture. Kelly ^hi! 19:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This one can be handled on Commons, I believe. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:42, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Tony at reunion on 26 june 2010.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused user image. Kelly ^hi! 19:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:The Number 7 Poster.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 19:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Non-notable indie film,, of fan-art of user :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Scrubs PlayTV.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This could probably be replaced by a copyright-free image of the user interface. Kelly ^hi! 19:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:MapPortugal.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asummed GFDL license, also there were some concerns on the talk page concerning the included inset islands which are not in geographic position Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:28, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ozma.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is seemingly an unused png duplicate of File:Princess Ozma by John R. Neill.gif at commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Topiarydino.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete ★ Bigr Tex 22:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok this is going to sound silly, but would topiary count as sculpture, I am asking because of an FoP concern, here. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about the intellectual property issues here, honestly. I took the photograph, and am the creator of the photograph (and uploaded the photograph lo those many years ago), and as such I'm happy for it to be used in the article and I'll do whatever I need to as far as rights go. But if there's an intellectual property interest in the topiary itself (which I would guess there would be, but IANAL) I assume those rights are owned by Uncle Walt—it's at Epcot, which may not even be a public place for freedom of panorama purposes—so I don't know. Pull it or zap it if there's some question; the article is adequately illustrated without it and I don't want to get WMF in trouble.«Charles A. L.» wuz here–♥ 17:17, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Local copy of Commons:File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg. Tagged with {{Keep Local}}, but the uploader has been gone for over six years and no reason is given for keeping a local copy. Kelly ^hi! 19:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. No reason to keep local copy. Reh man 14:26, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Uploader explained their reasons quite clearly at User:Redvers/Say no to Commons. ★ Bigr Tex 23:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has been gone for 6 years. Kelly ^hi! 10:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ronse railway station 3441776801.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused low-res version of File:Ronse station (3441776801).jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:A soldier of the Great War, known unto God; Essex Farm cemetery 2999986145.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: deleted by Explicit. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused local copy of Commons:File:A soldier of the Great War, known unto God; Essex Farm cemetery 2999986145.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 20:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Uploader requested {{Keep local}}. ★ Bigr Tex 23:15, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has been gone for 6 years. Kelly ^hi! 10:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Rotterdam Centraal 2462518862.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete czar 06:12, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused low-res version of File:Rotterdam Centraal - april 2008.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:1st DCLI 2461764294 entrance.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused low-res version of File:War graves cemetery entrance.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:John Hunter 2206660627.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused low-res copy of File:Bust of John Hunter, Leicester Square (2206660627).jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, uploader requested {{Keep local}}. ★ Bigr Tex 23:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has been gone for 6 years. Kelly ^hi! 10:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dickebusch Old Military Commonwealth War Graves Commission Cemetery entrance stone.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - low-res version of File:Dickebusch Old Military Cemetery 1848255324.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 21:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Voormezeele municipal cemetery CWGC stone 512568746.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused local version of File:Voormezeele municipal cemetery CWGC stone.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 21:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, uploader requested {{Keep local}}. ★ Bigr Tex 23:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has been gone for 6 years. Kelly ^hi! 10:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Voormezeele Enclosure no3 CWGC cemetery 512568858.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused local copy of File:Voormezeele Enclosure no3 CWGC cemetery.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 21:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Replacement is on Commons. Reh man 14:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, uploader requested {{keep local}}. ★ Bigr Tex 23:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has been gone for 6 years. Kelly ^hi! 10:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:1994 GCC conference table.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed , claimed as own but attributes : "archive photograp Previously published: Arthur Brett 2004 catalogue and website" Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:InnovationPlaza.jpeg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative of designed sign, US does not have full FoP. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Emami logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gradient background behind graphic may tip this over originality threshold. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Official Seal of San Antonio, Quezon.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete as improper license ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Phillipine seal, I fail to see how such designs are own work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Official Seal of Candelaria, Quezon.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep as non-free use ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine seal, I failt to see how such designs are own work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:37, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BumpTop logo.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by BU Rob13 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo is claimed to fall under the Apache license at Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bumpus Jones.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by BU Rob13 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying status, as Commons thinks this is PD-US-1923 Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:CNTP-logo 1.JPG.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it only simple text. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:23, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Cabify logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this logo is non-free given it's mostly text, with one lightly stylised character and a single geometric element Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Canal Uno (Ecuador) logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is 'non-free' as it's simple text and three geometric elements. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Center for Operations Research and Econometrics logo.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this is non-free as it's mostly text with a single gemotric/styleise R, Commons:File:LogoCORE-gf.jpg is considered 'simple'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.