Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 January 5

< January 4	January 6 >

January 5[edit]

File:CR's 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logo of non-notable organization. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:39, 5 January 2017 (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:CrabEmu-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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logo for article that was deleted for lack of notability. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:40, 5 January 2017 (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:Craic comics logo.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable organization's logo. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:40, 5 January 2017 (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:Crazy Goat Hattrick.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vanity image. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:49, 5 January 2017 (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:CreationFlow logo.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable company (couldn't find anything in news or web on them) logo. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:50, 5 January 2017 (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:Crete200600045.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vanity image. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:53, 5 January 2017 (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:Cromer Crab.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality image, description is self-promotional. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:56, 5 January 2017 (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:Cronus(band).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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logo of non-notable band. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:57, 5 January 2017 (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:Crovy hackerstory lecrovax.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:04, 5 January 2017 (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:Crtez.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:07, 5 January 2017 (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:Crusty-toddlerpede-3.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use, also nightmares. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:07, 5 January 2017 (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:Clicker Heroes Level64.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: remove from incremental game. — ξ ^xplicit 00:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from incremental game. The usage there does not comply with WP:NFCC#1, as free incremental games or mock-ups thereof could be made; the WP:NFUR's statement that "The premise of incremental games (gameplay consists only of clicking) may be difficult to believe or understand for readers if it is not illustrated with an example" is insufficient in light of this replaceability problem. RJaguar3 | u | t 06:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on Clicker Heroes. Delete from incremental game. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:41, 5 January 2017 (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:Esso Hamburg.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 since the subject of the article is not the subject of this file, and thus the image being present on the article does not aide in readers' understanding of the article's subject itself. Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Esso Hamburger was caught in a strange cross channel mix-up between the British Admiralty, Bletchley Park and B-Diesnt and the Kriegsmarine during World War II. She was never meant to be sunk, as it would have shown to B-Diesnt that Naval Enigma security had been horsed. There is a section with the B-Diesnt article which discusses this event. It clearly illustrates to the user, the type and look of the ship was sunk. This is only image of the Esso from WW2 that has survived. It is out of copyright. scope_creep (talk) 16:14, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: Could you clarify why you believe this image to be out of copyright? I don't believe that's likely. Most likely, this image was taken in Europe somewhere where {{PD-Old-70}} applies. It would have been copyrighted as of the URAA date, which would have restored its copyright in the United States. I do not believe this meets WP:NFCC#8, so in the absence of an explanation, delete. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:47, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Image site says 1940-1941 as date. Probably Germany. Unknown author. Possibly PD in Europe post 2012, but that makes it after URAA, so PD in US in 2037 (95 years after publication, rounded up to the end of the year). Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:51, 11 January 2017 (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:Ludwig Stummel.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 since the subject of the article is not the subject of this file, and thus the image being present on the article does not aide in readers' understanding of the article's subject itself. Steel1943 (talk) 15:18, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Similar to previous arguments. Major player in B-Diesnt. Will eventually get his own bio article. Second World War identification image. No known owner. Well out of copyright. Illustrates a major point in B-Dienst. Taken from wayback machine on oocities site. Keep. scope_creep (talk) 15:54, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Definitely fails WP:NFCC#8. As for copyright status, Scope creep, you'll need to provide a specific argument for why it's out of copyright. Again, the picture is probably taken in a country where the copyright duration is life + 70. The 70 years alone take us to the URAA date, so the copyright would be restored and still in effect in the United States, even if it has since expired in the source country. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Same argument as Esso Hamburg.jpg - not PD to around 2037 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:55, 11 January 2017 (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:British Admiralty Naval Cipher Page 5.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not suitable for non-free use, because reducing it to a satisfactory size renders it impossible to read. Also, doesn't satisfy WP:NFCC#8. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:55, 5 January 2017 (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:Erhard Maertens.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 since the subject of the article is not the subject of this file, and thus the image being present on the article does not aide in readers' understanding of the article's subject itself. Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Erhard Maertens or Eberhard Maertens is Director of Naval Intelligence of the Kriegsmarine which included B-Dienst. He played a major part of b-dienst during ww2. The image was taken from the web, from archive.org on on site:oocities. It is the only one available anywhere. A large section of B-Diesnt is concerned with this image. It is a second world war 2 identification image of the individual for his papers. I really can't see how it's not useful in illustrating a major point in the article. scope_creep (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#8, as it isn't related to the article subject directly and is used only for illustrative purposes. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:57, 5 January 2017 (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:Star Television 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: convert to {{PD-logo}}. — ξ ^xplicit 00:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this non free? Is it the star right of the image that's above TOO? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be pretty basic. Suggest re-licensing to PD-logo and potentially transferring to Commons on the basis that it is a subsidiary of an American company (not sure if its Hong Kong headquarters affect this). Salavat (talk) 08:40, 6 January 2017 (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:Psyche20150929nasa.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 G4 by Jonathunder (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly deleted on Commons despite JPL credit, No license on local copy. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a more direct link to the source of the image. Per that website, it is "Copyright 2016 by Corby Waste". The fact that the image is on some NASA and other websites does not make it public domain or necessarily imply another free license. It was deleted from Commons and should not be moved there again. Jonathunder (talk) 15:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What was the rationale on commons? It appears to be a NASA image according to the page that hosted it, these are usually in the public domain unless otherwise noted (such as when NASA hosts other's content). To be clear JPL is a NASA center not a separate company. Fotaun (talk) 15:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That the image is on a NASA website with a NASA credit should mean its public domain. Fotaun (talk) 15:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, its was published on a NASA website with a NASA credit tag which AFAIK is public domain. Fotaun (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the Commons deletion discussion, it would be nice if this were in the public domain, but I don't think it is. NASA includes much artwork on its website that was created by independent contractors and the copyright status is not always clear, but we can't assume it's free. Jonathunder (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I see with this is that the NASA website is giving NASA the credit, and its not noting an exception to this. That it appears on a third-party website does not seem a good basis for saying its copyrighted or casting reasonable doubt on NASA's claim they created it. Fotaun (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2017 (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:Pho cineplexx press 01.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No indication that this image was released under the CC license. The image features on the official website of the artist here. Karst (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2017 (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:Ok Jaanu 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails MOS:FILM#Soundtrack and WP:NFCC#8. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:41, 5 January 2017 (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:Mount de Sales Academy postcard.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence may be needed to prove that this postcard was created prior to 1923. Either way, if this file is tagged for fair use in Mount de Sales Academy (Georgia), its use there fails WP:NFCC#8. Steel1943 (talk) 19:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This image is indeed of a vintage postcard said to date from 1910 listed for sale on eBay.^[1] The building was newly constructed in 1910, so it would make sense for it to have been depicted as a notable addition to the city's skyline. Moreover, these postcards were rather common during the early 20th century. Bradstonian (talk) 01:21, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Having seen many postcards from this era, this certainly looks like one, complete with creases and other evidence of aging. There's nothing to indicate this is not what it says it is. Jonathunder (talk) 16:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.ebay.com/itm/Macon-GA-Mount-De-Sales-Academy-c1910-Postcard-/331876682844

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:Pipedrive 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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Call me a bit rusty here (worked on files for about a year, then took a 6-month hiatus from doing so), but shouldn't this file actually be {{PD-logo}}? I'm unsure due to the "TM" mark in the top right corner. Steel1943 (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Steel1943 after reading up on PD-logo I didn't get a clear sense of PD-logo so would it be possible to please share a quick 101 explanation? (It's not about this specific logo for me and whether it's removed or not more just seeking to understand PD-logo guidelines so as to not do it again). Thank you WestportWiki (talk) 19:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WestportWiki, my concern is that I'm not actually sure if this qualifies for {{PD-logo}}, but I think it may. In a nutshell, a {{PD-logo}}-eligible image is an image that consists solely of text/letters and/or geometric shapes, which makes the image ineligible for copyright in the United States due to being too "simple". Usually, images such as the one you uploaded are definitely "too simple" since the image is only text, but ... what's throwing me off is that "TM" symbol in the top-right corner. I think the "TM" has no bearing on this and the image should be ineligible for copyright, even though the image is trademarked ... but I'm just not 100% sure about that at the moment. Steel1943 (talk) 19:47, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining User:Steel1943. WestportWiki (talk) 19:58, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The TM symbol indicates the word is a trademark, but that has no bearing on whether the text falls below the threshold of originality as an image under copyright protection. Trademark and copyright are different things. Jonathunder (talk) 14:40, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely falls below the threshold of originality. Re-license to PD-logo and transfer to Commons on the basis of it being a United States company. Salavat (talk) 08:37, 6 January 2017 (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:Melnikov pravda workers' club 1927.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo was taken in 1965, so it is not in PD in Russia/US. Alex Spade (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2017 (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:MBoivin Siberiapainting1.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 G11 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:04, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a link for this file since the source link in the description is wrong. Either way, this file is most likely a copyright violation since the uploader has recently uploaded several more from the same artist's web site http://www.mboivin-art.com/ . Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 5 January 2017 (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:MBoivin Windsor2.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 G11 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:04, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a link for this file since the source link in the description is wrong. Either way, this file is most likely a copyright violation since the uploader has recently uploaded several more from the same artist's web site http://www.mboivin-art.com/ . (Note: I purposely did not notify the uploaded about this image since I let them know about the issues with their recent uploads on their talk page, and I don't want to further confuse them with another notification of the such since they may resolve the issue with this image. [The uploader claims that the permission was provided by the copyright holder, so this nomination is, more or less, a placeholder in case the file's copyright issue doesn't get resolved prior to when the 7-day window when this discussion can be closed.]) Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2017 (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:Baidkinson.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic Use Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:04, 5 January 2017 (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:Baijukb.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:04, 5 January 2017 (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:Bal6.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:05, 5 January 2017 (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:Dead bristlecone pine.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality, unused. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, may as well delete it.

dino (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2017 (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:Deepkt001.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:10, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables Boy.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No encyclopedic use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:12, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables4.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables Girl.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables Zombie.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables1.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Derry~Londonderry CoC 2013.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have been "replaced" by File:Hull CoC black and white.jpeg in UK City of Culture. Keeping this image in that article may fail WP:NFCC#3 as an excessive use of fair use images. Steel1943 (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per WP:NFCC#8. File is a former logo which as pointed out by Steel1943 is no longer being used as the primary means of identification at the top of the article. It might be possible to keep this by moving it to UK City of Culture#First competition if sourced content specific to the logo itself is added somewhere within that section; it may also be possible to use file to another related article like Peace Bridge (Foyle) or Derry if sourced content about the image is add to either of them. Simply "showing" it in any article, however, without out a strong contextual connection between article content and image is decorative use which is not really allowed by the WP:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:08, 6 January 2017 (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:Deformables2.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables3.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables5.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Deformables6.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:37, 5 January 2017 (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:Degenerates.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:38, 5 January 2017 (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:Degu 2000 noortje.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:38, 5 January 2017 (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:Del Roof.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:39, 5 January 2017 (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:ERR route map 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File an excessively large non-free image (about 20x the NF guideline). The image is not an accurate map (lines are way too straight), more a schematic display - therefore the image could be re-drawn as a free image - in that context it becomes a replaceable image and fails WP:NFCC#1 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom as the image fails to meet WP:NFCC#1. Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Replace, surely a free version can be drawn up before this one is deleted. 117Avenue (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll have a go at redrawing it; no guarantees of promptness, though! I’ve downloaded the file so as not to depend on its continued survival here. A bit of the image (albeit probably inessential) seems cut off on the right side: in case it matters, if you still have the original PDF you can e-mail it to me. The maps don’t seem to be available any more at the source site, although I was able to get their 1924 PDF from the Wayback Machine. (@Ronhjones: the city is laid out on a pretty pervasive grid based on the original survey townships, so most of the straightness is reasonably true to life—but I also agree the map is schematic in nature, at least for the way the switches &c. are shown at a greatly increased scale.)—Odysseus 1479 19:18, 11 January 2017 (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:Demi-unidentified-aircraft.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:43, 5 January 2017 (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:Demi.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:43, 5 January 2017 (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:Demon 2004 hhh ioa.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEUS. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:45, 5 January 2017 (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:Gift-993290 1280.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 ⚡ 02:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused upload by a blocked sock. Licence is dubious - source site claims CC0, not CC-by, and that's itself dubious as the "artwork" here isn't part of that licence anyway. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also it's fugly tat. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2017 (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.

[1] ttp://www.ebay.com/itm/Macon-GA-Mount-De-Sales-Academy-c1910-Postcard-/331876682844

[1]