Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 March 24

< March 23	March 25 >

March 24

File:Pacific West Conference logo.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: Relicense to non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:54, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TOO concern, given the mountains. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:39, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to non-free logo. I don't think the mountains would fall under simple geometric shapes. Salavat (talk) 02:08, 25 March 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:Page from Science report MHSG 1882.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a scan from an OLD report it can't be self work? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:42, 24 March 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:Paknam welcome sign.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sign design is owned by a third party. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:47, 24 March 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:Dinker Belle University Pic.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: Deleted, dubious self-work claim and missing evidence of permission at best -FASTILY 03:34, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Refferal as this seems to be a scan of third party content. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:54, 24 March 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:Semi-Circular Quay Model.gif

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: resolved. Follow up with the uploader if you want confirmation of authorship logged with OTRS. czar 03:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possible derivative of non-free content (models) FASTILY 01:04, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FastilyBot Re- Semi-Circular Quay Model image upload. The model and photo file are both my property and concept. The model is of the Semi-Circular Quay concept proposal by Lionel Todd and myself. The uploaded computer drawing is my CADD drawing of a detailed variation of the same concept. Lionel Todd, Sydney Opera House Stage 111 Architect, is now deceased and I hold exclusive copyright to both. Tony Rodi (talk) 01:03, 25 March 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:Barry Stokes (actor).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image being used to identify a living person. Despite the arguments made for non-free use on File talk:Barry Stokes (actor).jpg, non-free use in such cases (as discussed in Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 67#Replaceable fair use for retired/no longer publically active living individuals) for individuals who may be retired or who are no longer in the public eye is usually only acceptable when said individual's appearance is one of the reasons they are Wikipedia notable. There's no sourced discussion of Stokes in Barry Stokes (actor) which requires the reader actually see a photo of him to be understood. Moreover, the claim in the non-free use rationale that non-free use is justified because it illustrates Stokes as a handsome leading man is WP:OR sounding since it's not something supported by any cited content within the article. I think it's a given that many leading men are "handsome" to a certain degree and this in and of itself does not really seem to be a reason to justify non-free use. If the point of this photo is to show that Stokes is handsome, then there's no real need to use this particular screenshot and perhaps one of the photos found at http://www.aveleyman.com/ActorCredit.aspx?ActorID=16582 could be used instead. If there are other photos which might be used for basically the same purpose, the non-free use of any of them then is primarily decorative and not really justified per WP:NFCC#8. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:32, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly - Are images at http://www.aveleyman.com/ActorCredit.aspx?ActorID=16582 free? Beryl reid fan (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are since they look like they were taken from somewhere else and not something created by the owner of that website. The best place to ask about that would be at WP:MCQ. It's possible their use would be considered fair use under US copyright law, but Wikipedia's non-free content policy has been made intentionally more restrictive than the US concept of fair use for the reasons explained in WP:NFC#Background. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

O.K., thanks. Beryl reid fan (talk) 20:00, 24 March 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:PanamaJoeGans.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image is in use, but is technically unsourced. FFD rather than CSD, as this is claimed to be a PD-US image. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:51, 24 March 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:Papachristou and family.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image is unused, there's no claim of notability as to the subject asserted, and a cursory google scan didn't show anything obvious. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:57, 24 March 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:Papachristou Family Photo.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, No notability of subject asserted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:57, 24 March 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:Papachristou Harvest.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, lo-res, No notability of subject asserted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:59, 24 March 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:Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No longer convinced this is acceptable for Commons, the source field reading "on my PC", Was this own as claimed or not? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I rather doubt that the uploader holds the copyright as claimed. The uploader has a history of dubious copyright claims. The most telling example is this discussion. --Whpq (talk) 11:47, 24 March 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:Pasquale Vinaccia.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dead source, Given the dates almost certainly PD-old, but not possible to confirm this as no artist/photographer given. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:08, 24 March 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:Passenger Lisr RMS Etruria.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 2017 May 7. czar 03:16, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Passenger Lisr RMS Etruria.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:Patrick Gibbs.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown author, May well be a service photo (in which instance no issue), but the source given is a UK newspaper, which gives no credit line for the image. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:31, 24 March 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:Pep Comics panel.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 F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is using the standard PD-US tag, however the work is from 1940. Anyone checked for a renewal so that the license tag can be updated? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just did that. Pep Comics was checked for 1967 & 1968; there were no renewals. I added search details to the file and changed the license to PD-not renewed on the basis of the search. We hope (talk) 12:54, 24 March 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:Personal Photoshoot.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unusued, No notability of subject asserted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:20, 24 March 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:MTRlightrail.svg

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 fair use. ℯ xplicit 00:52, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be relicensed non-free logo? It was deleted on Commons as non-free/exceeding the threshold of originality. — Train2104 (t • c) 12:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Change licensing to non-free logo, no way this falls below TOO. Salavat (talk) 02:06, 25 March 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:Adolf Hitler color portrait.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Official" portrait is likely not own work. — Train2104 (t • c) 13:31, 24 March 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:Ankit BabuAdhikari.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader cites own work here but references magazine in caption [1] — Train2104 (t • c) 13:34, 24 March 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:Salnovin.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary picture showing a non-notable person damiens.rf 14:58, 24 March 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:StrongBoard balance.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Site says "Image released under creative commons 4.0" with no indication as to which CC license. Somebody somewhere must've put that as advice for donating copyrighted materials, since I see it often nowadays. — Train2104 (t • c) 23:18, 24 March 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:TYJ miso ramen.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 ⚡ 05:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted as a derivative work per c:COM:PACKAGING (t) Josve05a (c) 23:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the reasons given by the nominator. I thought this might be a candidate to be converted to WP:NFC#non-free content, but the way the file is being used is completely decorative and would not satisfy WP:NFCC#8. In addition, it would probably be idea to take a closer look at the other files in Tee Yih Jia; they are all licensed the same way by the same uploaded and some of them look like they might be copyvios. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: I've FFD'ed the larger logo and other food packaging, and converted the smaller logo to non-free. I'm not too sure the photo of spring rolls is own work either... — Train2104 (t • c) 02:02, 25 March 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.