Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 26

< February 25	February 27 >

February 26

This TV logos

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: convert File:Wmor dt2.png and File:KDMI Logo.png to {{PD-logo}}; no consensus for the remaining logos. — ξ ^xplicit 01:12, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if the above non-free versions of This TV logos can be changed from non-free to {{PD-logo}} based upon File:This TV logo.svg which is already on Wikimedia Commons as well as File:Thiscincy.jpg, File:Krnv dt2.png, and File:Wlov dt2.png which have been tagged with {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. If these are considered to be too simple to be eligible for copyright protection, they could be tagged with {{Trademark}} and for a move to Commons. In addition, there are 5 more files similar to "File:Wkcf dt2.png2", 19 more similar to "File:Wrgb dt2.png", 11 more similar to "File:ThisTV Phoenix.png" which also may be candidates for "PD-logo" since they are essentially the same design with only the affiliate name being different. I can list all of the other files here as well if necessary, but they can be found via List of This TV affiliates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:WZMQ19.png seems to be above the threshold of originality.

Some logos, such as File:ThisTV Phoenix.png, have light effects. I'm not sure if the light effects are sufficiently original to be copyrighted.

A number of logos do not have working sources. For example, I added {{dead link}} to File:KDMI Logo.png. If the logos are correct, then most logos in the set can be retagged as PD-textlogo. I managed to find a source for File:Wkcf dt2.png and uploaded it to Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefan2: Regarding "File:WZMQ19.png", there are File:WDJT DS Logo.png, File:MNTVab logo.jpg, File:WSTR64.jpg and File:WPME former logo (2007-2009).png already on Commons, but not sure if their licensing is really OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The files on Commons look fine as they do not have the 3D effects from File:WZMQ19.png. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:02, 3 March 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:Bumblefoot photo by Mikkel Elbech.jpeg

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, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

no licensing proof RF23 (talk) 09:12, 26 February 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:Kurumburak.svg

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, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, very poorly coded svg map (note file size), no foreseeable use; was uploaded by a sock puppet FASTILY 11:10, 26 February 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:TaylorSwiftCharlotteNC 8JUN2015.jpg

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, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete File is an orphan. It is not used anywhere. I was the uploader. I would like it removed. Eric Cable | Talk 22:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The file probably falls into the project scope of Wikimedia Commons, where the relevant category would be c:Category:The 1989 World Tour. (I don't support or oppose any action due to recent involvement with the uploader in dispute resolution.) – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a public-domain file, no reason to delete it just because it's not in use on English Wikipedia at this precise moment. Suggest moving it to Commons. Softlavender (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's not in the public domain, and the uploader and copyright holder's wishes should be considered if there is no particular reason to keep it. There is no shortage of free images of Swift or even of this specific tour, so there's no reason to keep this specific image. Huon (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in the public domain, but under a free license (Attribution, c:Template:Attribution) that is acceptable for Wikimedia Commons. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, legally there's nothing preventing us from keeping it or spreading it even further by adding it to the Commons. However, I cannot imagine circumstances where adding this specific image to an article would be required to improve the encyclopedia, and consequently see no reason not to honor the photographer's wish to have the image deleted. Huon (talk) 01:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Huon. I appreciate it. Eric Cable | Talk 12:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per EricCable; good faith uploader request. -FASTILY 03:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Fastily. Eric Cable | Talk 12:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is an orphaned file, and uploading the file doesn't relieve the copyright holder of that copyright unless they tag the file with {{PD-self}}, which EricCable did not do. As there are already numerous images of Taylor Swift during the 1989 World Tour on Commons, adding this particular image to Commons will not significantly add value to the project. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 13:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jkudlick. Eric Cable ! Talk 04:28, 28 February 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:Coal Authority logo.jpg

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, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unused logo, superceded in use by File:Coal Authority logo.png. Cloudbound (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surely moving this to commons would be more appropriate, as this is now a past logo? Acather96 (click here to contact me) 14:32, 29 February 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.