Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 December 17

< December 16	December 18 >

December 17[edit]

File:JanetUnbreakableSingle.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 ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source cannot verify this is the official single cover. Its highly pixilated and looks fan-made. No official cover found as it was only released to radio >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 00:13, 17 December 2022 (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:Warsheikh Nature, sand.jpeg[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious copyright claim as the image could be found on Twitter [1] prior to the upload to Wikipedia. Ixfd64 (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2022 (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:Kevin Durant Season 3 Cover NBA 2K Mobile.jpeg[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This non-free video game cover is not used in the main infobox, nor is it the subject of significant sourced commentary. It fails WP:NFCC#3a, and as the second cover in use in the article fails WP:NFCC#3a. Whpq (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2022 (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:Joyce Robinson-Paul 2006.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 ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it fails NFCC#1 as Robinson-Paul is still alive, meaning a free equivalent could be created. I also don't think images can be used in election infoboxes, unless I'm wrong about that. reppop^talk 07:27, 17 December 2022 (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:ComicBookBurningPhoto.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 ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image appeared in 1948 in an issue of TIME Magazine (see [2]) whose copyright has been renewed appropriately (see for instance the table at wikisource:Portal:Time (magazine)). Since it is a news photo, opportunities to claim fair use may be limited. Felix QW (talk) 08:34, 17 December 2022 (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:Concepcion Aguila.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 ⚡ 13:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image, clearly credited to an individual photographer, is unlikely to be a government work. The 14th biennial conference mentioned in the description seems to have taken place in or after 1955 according to the Records of the AFUW. This implies that copyright had not lapsed when terms were extended to 70 years post mortem auctoris in 2005 ,and thus the image is still in copyright both in Australia and the USA. It is also not in use in article space. Felix QW (talk) 10:01, 17 December 2022 (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:Craig-atwood-marshall.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. Whpq (talk) 14:40, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The file has been tagged as published before 1927, but I see no evidence for this. The given source is from 1998 and it does not look like a formal studio portrait to me. Felix QW (talk) 10:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The book the image was sourced from says the image was taken by an unknown photographer in about 1920, soon after the ladies moved in together. The image is important in the articles in which it appears as a visual image of the Ménage à trois the three ladies had entered into. The book was published in 1998; the image wasn’t taken then as all three ladies were long dead. Jack1956 (talk)

Keep - image is clearly out of copyright 2A00:23C6:3310:E101:B07D:C4AB:8797:9213 (talk) 21:54, 25 December 2022 (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:DallasCrane2014.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. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:26, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The summary calls it a publicity shot, suggesting that it is not the uploader's own work. However, it is at high resolution and comes with full EXIF data, which may indicate that it is the uploader's own work after all. What do others think? Felix QW (talk) 15:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 03:18, 18 December 2022 (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:UTA Arad.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. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:26, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, superseded by File:UTA Arad logo.svg. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 03:18, 18 December 2022 (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:Dhaka Racing presenting to 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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Own work claim has previously been flagged as having potentially a license issue; it is of reasonably low resolution and without EXIF data. Felix QW (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2022 (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:Eddie Dyer, Manager, Houston Buffaloes.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 ⚡ 01:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The licensing information for this file is inaccurate. It was not and could not have been published before 1927 because it could not have been taken before Dyer became manager of the Houston Buffaloes in 1939. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2022 (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:Eddie Dyer and Joe Cronin, Sport Magazine, July 1947.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 ⚡ 01:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fair use rationale for this image is not accurate. First, it is replaceable by free media. There is a free image of Eddie Dyer here. Also, as for "Respect for commercial opportunities," it ignores the fact the photo is also of Hall of Famer Joe Cronin and only addresses that "no one cares about Eddie Dyer." Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2022 (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.