Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 February 13

< February 12	February 14 >

February 13[edit]

File:John M. Burns (2005).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: If you are the copyright holder and/or have been authorized to publish this file to Wikipedia, please follow these instructions to get the file restored. Thanks, FASTILY 08:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flagged presumably as a derivative work of the magazine cover 10 years ago by (a legal sock of) ShakespeareFan00, I am putting this out there since it may qualify for de minimis; besides, cropping or blurring the cover would also allay the DW concerns. Felix QW (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was one of the editors of the (noncommercial) fanzine at the time. It no longer exists. I also have the contact details for the cover artist. Not familiar with WP procedures on this - how could I prove any of this? Vizjim (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It would be great if you could reach out to the cover artist and ask him to contact VRT with permission to use the image here. A template can be found here. Many thanks! Felix QW (talk) 17:01, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Whpq (talk) 03:49, 13 February 2023 (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:John-William-Brodie-Innes.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a formal studio portrait, and no trace of the publication history. Could well be copyrighted in the US until up to 2043, but may qualify as fair use unless an undoubtably free image emerges. Felix QW (talk) 12:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly fair use as the subject died in 1923 and no other image freely available. I believe the image dates to 1890-1911. Jack1956 (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Whpq (talk) 03:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly out of copyright in the US as it was published pre-1928. Furthermore, photographs from the UK with an unknown author enter the PD 70 years after creation, meaning that this file is also PD in the country of origin. Keep and copy to Commons. House Blaster^talk 04:53, 21 February 2023 (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:BODENHEIMER.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication of the date of this orphaned photograph. If it was taken in Israel after 1945, it would still be copyright protected in the US until 95 years after publication due to URAA restoration in 1996. Felix QW (talk) 13:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:38, 18 February 2023 (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:United Arab Emirates flag with text.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 G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary reproduction of File:Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg. Border and text can be manually added. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:25, 13 February 2023 (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:Federated States of Micronesia flag with text.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 G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary reproduction of File:Flag of the Federated States of Micronesia.svg. Border and text can be manually added. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:25, 13 February 2023 (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:Gez matilda.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image, taken from the Knesset page file is unlikely to be PD in the US as the subject only emigrated to Israel in 1957 and thus Israeli copyright would not have expired before 2008. It is also ineligible for non-free use as alternatives exist on Commons. Felix QW (talk) 15:08, 13 February 2023 (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:Illumination Studios Paris 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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was tagged saying it does not have proper copyright, I would like advice on what to do, if this image is fair use or else -Gouleg🛋️ ^harass/_hound (she/her) 15:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Replace non-free use rationale with ordinary information template The file is tagged as below the threshold of originality in both France and the US, which seems reasonable to me.

In this case, the non-free use rationale is redundant and should simply be replaced with an ordinary information template. Felix QW (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

great, which template is it? -Gouleg🛋️ ^harass/_hound (she/her) 16:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's simply the ordinary template:information. I am happy to do it myself, but we should probably wait for this discussion to be formally closed in around a week's time. Maybe others have a different view on whether this logo is below the ToO. Felix QW (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is text and a few simple geometric shapes. We can give it an Information tag, a PD-textlogo tag and export it to Commons or tag it with Copy to Wikimedia Commons. I will at least change the license for now (Edit: Someone already did this), to prevent the old, bigger revision from being deleted. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 11:04, 18 February 2023 (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:Halevi binyamin.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication of the date of this orphaned photograph, whose subject died in 1996. If it was taken in Israel after 1945, it would still be copyright protected in the US until 95 years after publication due to URAA restoration in 1996. Felix QW (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:40, 18 February 2023 (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:Rexton sign.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works or text in the United Kingdom. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:41, 18 February 2023 (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.