Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 August 21

< August 20	August 22 >

August 21

File:Pierre Caziot.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: relisted on 2018 August 29. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pierre Caziot.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Al Thumama Stadium.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non free Use criteria "Not replaceable with free media because (WP:NFCC#1)" now void due to a free image available at Commons. File:Al Thumama Stadium model.jpg DBig Xray 23:06, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the free image is a model of the stadium’s exterior. The image used in the Infobox is an artwork of the stadium’s interior. Typically, we use interior views of a stadium for the lead as it is the most recognisable part of a stadium to spectators inside the stadium and broadcast viewers of sports events at the stadium. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 23:11, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(reply to uploader) both the images are Encyclopaedic. So The NFU criteria violation get precedence. Also There is no such Typical precedence for interior of the stadium, on the contrary mostly exterior pics are used Krestovsky Stadium, Kaliningrad Stadium Otkritie Arena Krestovsky Stadium, Kazan Arena and many more. --DBig Xray 23:18, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those are outliers against what is desired for these infoboxes – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 23:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There is no deadline. At some point, this stadium will be created and at that point, we can take a picture of it. WP:NFCC#1 does not say we can use an image under a claim of fair use if a free one cannot be created TODAY. It doesn't say we can use an image under a claim of fair use if a free one can be obtained by googling from your easy chair. We can reasonably expect that, in the future, we will have a freely-licensed image of the interior of this stadium and so we shouldn't be using one under a claim of fair use. --B (talk) 12:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note - something seems to be malfunctioning with this image at the moment. When I go to File:Al Thumama Stadium.jpg, the :en image description page and history (complete with IFD tag, etc) is showing up, but the image Commons:File:Al Thumama Stadium.jpg is showing up instead of the :en image. --B (talk) 19:51, 28 August 2018 (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:Newspaper clipping of the Bowles Rocks Gymnasium.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1960s newspaper clipping. No suggestion made that the uploader is the original photographer who is now able to release these photos under a CC licence. Lord Belbury (talk) 08:50, 21 August 2018 (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:TOMERPGLogo.png

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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a non-free logo claimed to be used as "primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question" but is in fact used in a section of the article. The logo itself is not the subject of significant sourced commentary. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom: not actually used on a game's article. The section in developer's article hardly qualifies. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I actually had permission from the person who made this logo to upload this. How do I go ahead and provide proof for that; I'm new to uploading it here? (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeanutButterMarshmallowTime (talk • contribs) [reply]
- The image is being used as a non-free image. Permission from the copyright holder for use on wikipedia is irrelevant. -- Whpq (talk) 04:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @PeanutButterMarshmallowTime, it requires a wider release than permission for use on Wikipedia: instead, a Creative Commons license (cc-by-sa or freer). If worth pursuing, you can have the copyright holder complete this consent form, sent to the listed address. Give me a heads up and I can try to help. Might I suggest requesting a screenshot in lieu of the logo, though? Would be more functional as an illustration. czar 16:59, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. No valid use rationale, as a business logo is not by any reasonable standard an identifying image of a person. Claimed permission is patently insufficient as a free license. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2018 (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:Dawson Williams.png

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. Apparently non-free, there is already another image of them on their article so no reason to relicense as non-free per WP:NFCC#1 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Published in the British Medical Journal in 1928. Most likely not public domain. (It comes from a US Government website, but their copyright note at the top of the source page says that much of their material is not from US Government publications and is copyrighted.) B (talk) 12:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

B, what US Government website? The NCBI, yip? The BMJ is British journal and the obituary was accepted for the BMJ on 10 March 1928, for Williams, who was the longest serving editor of the BMJ, and that includes the image. scope_creep (talk) 14:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the British version of it: https://www.bmj.com/content/1/3505/414

I suppose we could change the source for the image.

scope_creep (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source you gave is a US government website - The National Institute of Health. They, however, got it from The BMJ. The image is most likely under copyright. You said, "This file is in the public domain, because It it was created before 1928 and is therefore in public domain", which is certainly not true. Changing the source doesn't make the image public domain. The US does not use the rule of the shorter term, so if it was first published in the UK (which one would think it probably was published first there), then it's life of the author plus 70 years. So we would need to prove that the photographer died prior to 1948 in order for it to be public domain. --B (talk) 15:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite hard to prove that I think. I can upload another on Fair Use. I dont think it would be possible to prove the author is deed before 1948. I spent a couple of hours on it, and cant find a thing. scope_creep (talk) 16:11, 22 August 2018 (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:Kylie - Golden (single cover).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 as F7 by B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image is taken from a fan made blog website for graphic design artwork, as exampled here: 1 livelikemusic talk! 14:57, 21 August 2018 (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:Golddusttwins.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this photo was originally published without a copyright notice and thus no evidence it is PD. Both articles have other photos, so fair use isn't applicable. B (talk) 23:31, 21 August 2018 (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:Henry de Montherlant.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded fair use photo. This article has a painting of Montherlant by Jacques-Émile Blanche, who died in 1942 and so his works have all been public domain since 2012. B (talk) 23:35, 21 August 2018 (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:Square One.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low-resolution, insufficient context to determine encyclopedic use B (talk) 23:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 00:05, 28 August 2018 (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:SJAB President.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. Purports to be a self-made version of a rank insignia, but it looks like it's cropped from a photo. No indication of the source of the original photo is given. B (talk) 23:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 00:06, 28 August 2018 (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.