Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 June 7

< June 6	June 8 >

June 7[edit]

Visual identifiers of Drive (The Cars song)[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 side label, delete secondary cover czar 16:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added the US side label because the US release of the US song was a commercial hit at its time. Well, the release lacked a picture sleeve. I could not replace the picture sleeve from overseas (UK/Europe) because, like so many, the uploader prefers a cover art for... maybe, the looks of it. Even when the song was also an overseas hit, the cover art is not necessary unless having two images at the page is tolerable or acceptable. --George Ho (talk) 05:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Appropriate fair use rationale is filed. Carrite (talk) 12:55, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Only one image is permitted for basic identification purposes (WP:NFCC#3) so the picture cover would need a unique rationale. I can restore the image if you'd like to add one. czar 16:00, 1 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:Ring Ring.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 Swedish original, which charted best, delete Danish alternative for lack of encyclopedic benefits czar 15:55, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image is front cover of Danish release. There is already an image of the Swedish release. Also, there is an additional Swedish release of the English version, which lacks a picture sleeve. There is no need to display an unfree image of ABBA as there are free images of the band. George Ho (talk) 09:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would keep this but delete File:Ring Ring (Swedish).jpg instead. Stifle (talk) 13:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating the Swedish side label for discussion. George Ho (talk) 01:00, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why, Stifle? George Ho (talk) 01:02, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this one because it's a better image than the other I mentioned; delete one of the two per WP:NFCC#3a. Stifle (talk) 09:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better shouldn't be the reason for keeping one and deleting the other, Stifle. Here is a Swedish side label for the English version. --George Ho (talk) 10:40, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am ambivalent on which one to delete, but only one can stay per NFCC#3a. Stifle (talk) 12:37, 9 June 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:Suffolk CWGC Cemetery Entrance Stone 1848778638.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This file is currently shadowing an identical file with higher resolution at Commons, but it is tagged as "keep local" so not eligible for F8 deletion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The original uploader tagged it with nocommons because it was "incorrectly attributed on Commons", but I'm not sure what that's about since the attribution that is exactly the same and always has been. At any rate, there's no point in keeping a low-res copy of this around here, especially when it's shadowing the full-res version on Commons. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 16:08, 12 June 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:ABBA - Waterloo (Deluxe Edition).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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image replicates the original LP edition. It should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 10:07, 7 June 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:ABBA - Ring Ring (Deluxe Edition).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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replicates the original LP cover. Should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 10:11, 7 June 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:Smartart 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 by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused (non-notable?) company logo, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 10:17, 7 June 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:TateBookstore.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo; no encyclopedic use FASTILY 10:29, 7 June 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:Rajahmundry.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, blurry. Stefan2 (talk) 12:46, 7 June 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:Chetak.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, low quality, unidentified subject. Stefan2 (talk) 12:50, 7 June 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:Ooty botanical garden.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader wrote author : ram kumar.y - kangeyam. An IP changed this to AUTHOR : SELVA KUMAR.L - DHARMAPURI. Who is the author and what is the author's connection to the uploader? Stefan2 (talk) 12:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That IP has changed other uploads with the same uploader as well, for the record.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:44, 9 June 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:Justin Bieber Purpose Saudi Arabian 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: no consensus. — ξ ^xplicit 09:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC item 3a as two non-free images are being used where one would suffice, item 8 as the image is being used solely decoratively and is not the subject of critical commentary, therefore does not add substantially to readers' understanding of the article and its removal would not be detrimental to that understanding, and item 10c as the description page does not include a separate, specific non-free use rationale that is relevant to each use (only a generic rationale which is wrong in material parts such as the purpose of use section).

Previously deleted as File:Justin Bieber - Purpose (Official Album Cover) (Saudi Arabia).png for the above reason under CSD:F7, but the uploader has chosen to readd it under a new name rather than to file a DRV. Stifle (talk) 13:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I dispute the nominator's claim that only one non-free image would suffice and that the nominated image is being used decoratively, because the original album cover (displayed at the top of the Purpose (Justin Bieber album) article) was banned in Middle Eastern countries on religious grounds, and this is the cover that was created in response. This is documented by several third party sources, including MSN, Fox News, and Yahoo. (Sidenote: I was not the original uploader of the deleted image, and DRV is only used for discussions, not drive-by tagging.) Chase (talk | contributions) 17:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- DRV is for all deletions, not only deletions which were subject to a discussion. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Perhaps this discussion is a sign that the image should have originally been listed at FFD instead of being tagged as a blatant NFCC violation (it may be a violation according to you, but my rationale proves that it is not an obvious one). Think of this as a modified example of BRD. I did not act out of policy, and regardless we're here, so it's best to focus the discussion on the merits of the file in question. Cheers. Chase (talk | contributions) 20:31, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article would be just as easy to understand with only one image. Fails WP:NFCC#3a. There's no sourced critical commentary about the cover in the article, at least not in the section where it is used. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Being the source of critical commentary is not a stipulation specified in NFCC. If we excluded album covers on the basis that they have not been commented on by critics, the vast majority of album articles would not have non-free artwork. NFCC-3a is met because two images are needed to provide visual identification (the rationale used for all non-free covers) to readers who live in Middle Eastern countries where the original cover was not made available. NFCC-8 is met because the image increases the understanding of the religious controversy caused by the original album cover, and excluding the image would take away the reader's understanding of said controversy. Chase (talk | contributions) 20:31, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Without sourced critical commentary about the additional covers, WP:NFCC#8 only permits one cover. A religious controversy about the original cover isn't discussed in the article, at least not in the section in which the cover is used. If there isn't any discussion about a religious controversy in a section, there is no need to include any pictures illustrating the said controversy. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Obviously you haven't read the article, because the religious controversy is described in a footnote immediately below where this image is being used. Chase (talk | contributions) 01:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - That's the wrong way around: non-free images are included for the purpose of illustrating text, but in this case, text has been included for the purpose of describing the image. Text which has only been included for the purpose of describing an image can easily be removed from the article if the image is removed and doesn't make an image satisfy WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete – Although Chase has a point that the need for a second cover in Middle Eastern countries is documented, it is not a major documentation. Secondly I believe the cover fails WP:NFCC#8 specifically because the cover itself is replaceable by describing with words, something the article already has as "An alternate cover was issued for these countries, depicting Bieber atop a cliff, looking out over a shore". —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep The commentary in the article about the alternate cover is not limited to what is in the footnote. There is also text in the article, as follows: "Purpose was initially banned in various Middle Eastern countries and Indonesia due to the cover art's heavy Christian references, most prominently Bieber's cross tattoo and his praying stance, which were deemed "too provocative".[63] An alternate cover was issued for these countries, depicting Bieber atop a cliff, looking out over a shore.[62]" I think readers may be interested in how the cover was modified in response to these concerns. Weak keep because the visual content most relevant to this discussion is the original cover (readers would want to see what the Christian references are), but I think the comparison between the two is also relevant. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:46, 15 June 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:Speechless.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 ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFC#UUI §2. Covers should only appear in the article about the product, not in the article about the band. Stefan2 (talk) 13:04, 7 June 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:Invisible.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 ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFC#UUI §2. Covers should only appear in the article about the product, not in the article about the band. Stefan2 (talk) 13:04, 7 June 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:D-Side Real World.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 ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFC#UUI §2. Covers should only appear in the article about the product, not in the article about the band. Stefan2 (talk) 13:04, 7 June 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:Elvena Lloyd-Dufﬁe.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 ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8. Also, it's unclear whether the person is dead or not. Stefan2 (talk) 16:52, 7 June 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:Olimpia Ramnicu Sarat 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#9: former logo. Stefan2 (talk) 17:06, 7 June 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:Jenness-for-president.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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 in Age of candidacy and WP:NFCC#9 in User:Rorschach/List of female United States presidential and vice-presidential candidates. Stefan2 (talk) 17:13, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually a public domain image. I moved it to Commons and replaced the usages. Feel free to delete. Kaldari (talk) 18:09, 7 June 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:Prettyboy Mayweather.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 MER-C (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:08, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly bogus public domain claim Whpq (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I've deleted the other copy, which was uploaded to Commons, because it is clearly a copyright violation. The uploader copied the file from boxrec.com and then tried to thank the "author" for giving permission, but that user quite clearly refutes the idea that any permission has been given. Green Giant (talk) 17:34, 8 June 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:TriCitiesBlackhawks.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historic National Basketball Association logo being used decoratively (no critical commentary on the logo anywhere in the article) in Atlanta Hawks#Franchise history, in violation of WP:NFCCP#8. NOTE: I will also notify User:SportsMaster who uploaded the original version. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:Atlanta Hawks.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historic National Basketball Association logo being used decoratively (no critical commentary on the logo anywhere in the article) in Atlanta Hawks#Franchise history, in violation of WP:NFCCP#8. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:AtlantaHawks1970.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historic National Basketball Association logo being used decoratively (no critical commentary on the logo anywhere in the article) in Atlanta Hawks#Franchise history, in violation of WP:NFCCP#8. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:AtlantaHawks1995.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historic National Basketball Association logo being used decoratively (no critical commentary on the logo anywhere in the article) in Atlanta Hawks#Franchise history, in violation of WP:NFCCP#8. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:Atlanta Hawks 2015 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

National Basketball Association logo with WP:NFCCP#3a concern. While there is some referenced commentary about the switch to this logo, File:Atlanta Hawks 2015 Primary Logo.png appears in the infobox and completely contains a copy of this logo, so it doesn't add information to the article. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:Hawks80slogo.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Historic National Basketball Association logo with WP:NFCCP#8 concern. The brief commentary about this original Atlanta Hawks logo in the article is unreferenced. ★ Bigr Tex 19:45, 7 June 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:Sir henry gurney.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: insufficient sourcing, no response from uploader: seven days to add fair use rationale czar 15:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not own work. This might be PD (though even if not it's probably fine for fair use). Just needs better source information and a corrected license. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly came from a book or similar and this looks a lot like photos I seem to remember from secondary school history text books in Malaysia. I'm not sure it will be easy to find sufficient sourcing info to show it's in PD. Nil Einne (talk) 05:16, 8 June 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:Maywether Corrales.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to fair use rationale, image is not being used as primary means of identification at the top of the article Whpq (talk) 22:04, 7 June 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:Mayweather-Gatti.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to the fair use rationale, image is not being used as primary means of identification at the top of the article. Whpq (talk) 22:06, 7 June 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:Mayweather De La Hoya.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 F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:07, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image is being used decoratively in a section of the article. There is no sourced commentary about the image and its removal would not affect the reader's understanding of the article Whpq (talk) 22:13, 7 June 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:VB Webtrader V3.7.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 ⚡ 06:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Low-res file with no camera EXIF info likely to be unfree (no evidence), uploaded by likely undisclosed paid editor with history of nonfree uploads. $ɱ$ (talk) · vbm · coi) 22:37, 7 June 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.