Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 May 25

< May 24	May 26 >

May 25

File:Pirkanmaa Region.png

I seem to have flagged this image as a "presumed self" some time ago. When originally uploaded in 2004! it had no license and a presumed GFDL was seemingly added early in 2005. Not sure how to handle an image this old. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kenilworth Castle ruined tower.jpg

Originally unlicensed when uploaded,"presumed GFDL" seems to have been applied around 2004, 2005 by a third party. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Simplified pulsejet1a.png

A presumed self, I seem to have added "Kevin J. Rice" at some point based on the image. but there's no easy way to verify the GFDL claim independently of the image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sheppard Line.png

"Presumed GFDL" , GFDL license tag seemingly added by a third party. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can confirm GFDL as uploader. Radagast (talk) 00:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn and flagged for Commons. Thanks for the confirmation.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ivantransition.jpg

Unused, personal image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:34, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Turkish theater 1933 - pishekar, kavuklu, three zenne, orchestra, on median (open space).png

Poor sourcing, Low res. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Obj shaded.png

"Presumed GFDL", Original upload had no license/source details. GFDL tag seems to have been added by a third party at a later date. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Confedstarburst.png

"Presumed GFDL"- GFDL tag seems to have been added by a third party some time in 2004, It's not clear why. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ca 1720.gif

Poor sourcing, Known source is 1935, but it's claimed to be from a much earlier publication. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fatehpurkiosk.jpg

Low res, "Presumed GFDL"- GFDL tag added by a third party, not clear why . File description states-"image by User: Markalexander100" but this is not the uploader name shown. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Immersion of Ganesh murti at Chowpatty Beach, Bombay.jpg

"Presumed GFDL" - GFDL tag added by a third party, File description states " image produced by User: Markalexander100" but that's not the uploader name shown. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Simpsons Blockoland.jpg

Unencyclopedic. The setting of Blockoland is a minor detail of this episode seen only at the start; the actual plot is completely unrelated and sees Homer go on hunger strike against a baseball franchise. '''tAD''' (talk) 01:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:National Bank of New Zealand logo.svg

Non-free file currently being used in Lloyds Bank#Expnasion, National Bank of New Zealand, Lloyds Associated Banking Company, Lloyds Bank California and Lloyds Bank Canada. Files has a non-free use rationale for each usage, but there are WP:NFCCP problems with each of these usages.

File is being used to illustrate a former logo in "Lloyds Bank". Although there is some discussion of the merger that led to this logo being replaced, the logo itself is not the subject of any sourced commentary within the relevant section so the context required by WP:NFCC#8 is lacking. Suggest remove from article unless the NFCC#8 issues are fixed.
File's usage in "Lloyds Associated Banking Company", "Lloyds Bank California" and "Lloyds Bank Canada" is problematic because of No. 17 of WP:NFC#UUI. Each of these is listed as a subsidiary of Lloyds Bank and the parent entities are generally not allowed to be used in stand-alone articles about their child entities. Moreover, the source url provided for the file, www.nationalbank.co.nz/rural/information/ruralreport/pdf/200812.pdf, is not longer working and the earliest archived version of it that I could find of it (here) does not indicate any connection to any of these three subsidiaries at all. I've tried searching for something to indicate such a connection, but have had no luck. This might be simply because all three subsidiaries have been defunct for almost 30 years. The connection between the logo and the subsidiaries is sketchy at best and very hard to verify so I suggest remove from each of the articles.
File's usage in "National Bank of New Zealand" is a bit unclear per NFCC#8 and No. 17 of NFC#UUI. According to the article, the bank was sold by Lloyd's to ANZ Bank in 2003, which would make it a subsidiary of ANZ Bank after 2003. The article says that an agreement was reached which allowed the bank to continue to use the Lloyds logo for a period of 7 years after the sale, but this statement not supported by a reliable source. However, based upon the archived url mentioned, it appears that the bank was using the logo as late as 2008, so it seems the logo is being used as stated in its non-free use rationale. The bank is listed as going defunct in 2012, which means, if the article is accurate, that it's possible that it was possibly using another logo after it's agreement with Lloyds ran out after 7 years and before it went defunct. the most recent archived version I could find of the bank using the Lloyds logo is from October 2012. This November 2012 archived version states that the bank "has joined with ANZ". So, I'm not sure how to reconcile what these websites with the "With the purchase, ANZ also bought the right to continue to use the Black Horse logo for seven years." in the article since the logo seems to have been used for more than 7 years after ANZ bought the bank. This is the only possible article where the file's usage seems to be NFCC compliant, but I am interested in hearing what others might think.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Real Housewives of New Jersey season 7 cast.png

Cast photo. Contrary to the stated rationale, the image is not being used as the primary means of identification at the top of the article. Whpq (talk) 02:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I uploaded the picture, however, with a wrong rationale, which is now fixed. The image is a piece of promotional material that was released by a spcific company to promote their work; in this case, the television network to promote their show. Mymis (talk) 02:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moffitt-mansion-after.jpg

Claimed as own work but there is a copyright watermark at the bottom right corner indicating it is copyrighted by Yenma K photography. Image is on their website. Swipe the images on the page and this photo will be part if the set. We would need OTRS confirmation that the uploader holds the copyright. Whpq (talk) 02:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moffitt-mansion-before.jpg

Image is described as own work and also described as circa 1900. So unless the uploader is 116 years old and took the picture as an infant, I rather doubt the claim of own work is valid. Whpq (talk) 02:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks' logos

Non-free logos being used twice each in Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks. Each file has a non-free use rationale for a single usage in the article, but no rationale for the second usage.

"File:Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks logo.svg" seems to be the current logo of the club. It is being used in the main infobox and it has a rationale for said usage, but it is also being in Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks#Emblem and colours in a gallery of logos which is problematic per WP:NFG. No rationale is provided for the second usage so it fails WP:NFCC#10c and there's also no way to write a valid rationale for such usage per WP:NFCC#3a since the same image is being used in the main infobox and can easily be referred to using text. Suggest keep for infobox and remove from gallery.
"File:Cronulla 1988.jpg" is a former logo of the team being used in Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks#1970s and the aforementioned gallery of images. Once again, there is no need to use the same non-free file twice per NFCC#3a. Moreover, the rationale provided for the file is more suited for using the file in the main infobox of the article, then as the subject of sourced commentary later on within the article so the compliance with NFCC#10c is a bit iffy. The logo itself is discussed in a little bit of detail in the "Emblem and colours" section, but none of the discussion is supported reliable sources which means it could be possibly removed by someone as WP:OR which would mean that the context for using the image required by WP:NFCC#8 will be gone as well. Not sure which of the two uses should be kept, but unless the NFCC#8 concerns are resolved to more firmly establish the context required for non-free use, I suggest remove from the article.
"File:Cronulla 1998.jpg" is being essentially used in the same manner as the 1988 logo, only in Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks#1990s and the same non-free concerns also apply. So, unless these are properly addressed, I suggest remove from the article.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 06:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tony-Miceli-Jazz-Vibraphonist.JPG

"Created by Tony Miceli.", No obvious connection with uploader. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:No Heels.jpg

Not sure if this is above TOO, It's a simple pictogram. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm not sure what the nomination is trying to say. And, as this is a crop of another image, there doesn't seem to be a case to answer. Andrew D. (talk) 09:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See Threshold of originality. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, ridiculously some otherwise simple pictograms are treated as above TOO. :( Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but we're not in the UK. This is exactly the same kind of nonsense discussed at WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#More_out_of_control_legalism_from_Stefan2. E Eng 13:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image should be treated as free: as a pictogram in the US, it would fall below the TOO, and the photographer has appeared to licensed the work freely (eg a derivative work of a free image could be copyrightable, but the photographer has allowed it to be freely used). --MASEM (t) 14:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The image is sometimes used in the United States on playgrounds with synthetic surfaces. It means that high heels will damage the play surface. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious delete, per WP:NFCC#1. This is a non-free image. It is not licensed for use on Wikipedia. It's a photograph of raindrops on a sign. If we want to illustrate the no-heels pictogram, we need to make a vector image ourselves and release it under a compatible license. HiDrNick! 18:12, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a free image as it was released by the photographer under a CC licence. HiDrNick seems to be quite mistaken. Andrew D. (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. Just because the photo was released, it doesn't mean the content in the first place is licensed. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:North Karelia.png

"GFDL presumed", GFDL tag added by a third party. Uploader info added by myself in good faith. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:16, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mary Pearcey.jpg

Unsourced, and I'm not seeng how this could be a crown work, given that Tussad's doesn't have an obvious connection. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:ROBIN AMIS.jpg

Credit line is " Lillian Delevoryas" , What is their connection with the uploader? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Northern Savonia.png

"Presumed GFDL", GFDL tag added by a third party, Uploader info added in good faith by myself. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:40, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yak Right Side.jpg

Low res, "Presumed GFDL", GFDL tag added by third party, Original upload had no sourcing/licensing. Uploader info added in good faith by myself. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bucksburn9.jpg

Delete - unused street image of Bucksburn. Probably no encyclopedic use. Kelly ^hi! 10:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but move to Commons, This is an example of UK street furniture, and a railed carrigeway/ seperateed service lane divider. Useful to students of highway planning. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bungeshea Avatar.png

Delete - unused personal image. Kelly ^hi! 10:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Georgeplaque.jpg

"Presumed GFDL", as in GFDL tag added by a third party, original upload had no sourcing/licensing. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:NK-pyongyang2.png

Unused, Generic source (German Wiki) , Low res. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ubulake.jpg

"taken by User: Markalexander100", apparent Author/Uploader mismatch. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:40, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sanjiang-streetscene-2003-08-17.jpg

"Presumed GFDL", i.e GFDL tag added by third party. uploader data added in good faith by myself later. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:FoxHuntingSketch.png

Does anyone have access to the book to confirm the permission statement given? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mark Z. Danielewski with hat and cat.jpg

Image is seemingly from a third party, author is credited, but the precise source isn't. (Seemingly submitted by a disclosed paid editor in connection with image subject.). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hofkirchesmall.jpg

GFDL tag apllied by third party in 2005, Uploader data added by myself in good faith. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elbflorenz2.gif

Unused, Low res, GFDL tag applied by third party in Dec 2004, Uploder info added by myself in good faith. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tuolsleng1.jpg

GFDL tag applied by third party in 2004-2005 Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stanleysmith99.jpg

Delete - unused file, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 12:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marionlongpainting.jpg

Image is a painting described as a painting by Marion Long. The non-free rationale claims it is being used as the primary means of identification for the Marion Long article but there is no indication this is a self portrait. The minimal use claims it is being used to identify the style of painting but there is no commentary sourced or otherwise about painting style. Whpq (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dorian fitzgerald art.jpg

Non-free image of artwork which is not the subject of any sourced commentary in the article in which it is used. Whpq (talk) 13:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reebokclassics303.JPG

Delete - unused crop of File:Reebokclassic999.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 13:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pat Contri.jpg

Invalid public domain reason. Publishing on Facebook does not constitute a public domain release. Whpq (talk) 13:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:The36autobus.jpg

Delete - unused file, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 13:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Syonlaneflash999.JPG

Delete - unused image, blurry. We have other images at Commons:Category:Syon Lane railway station. Kelly ^hi! 14:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Weetonrailway909.JPG

Delete - unused crop of File:Weeton station waiting room.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 14:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shevchenko schoolchildren.png

Undated, Source "Anna Zahoruk" , What is their connection with the uploader?. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Terengganuans-in-1906.jpg

This is sourced to a specific collection, and the connection with the uploader isn't clear. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Rose of Old St. Louis Cover page.jpg

Notwithstanding the book is old, this cover might not be. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:57, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Muhammad Hassan Baharly.jpeg

Poor sourcing, and it's definitely not a Wikipedia Screenshot as the license would suggest. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:09, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marilyn Klaus Headshot.jpg

Nico Malvaldi credited as the photographer, corporate name given as source, neither of which is the uploader name. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I indicated to another Wikipedia authority (not sure whom) earlier this month, I was granted permission to upload this image by both the photographer who took it, Nico Malvaldi, and the subject of the photo/director of Ballets with a Twist, Marilyn Klaus. If I mislabeled the file or attached the wrong designation to it, please explain in detail how I may correct the issue. Thank you. --Miohcal Flork (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]