Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 April 17

< April 16	April 18 >

April 17

File:Double Dare 1976 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: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality fan art drawing duplicative of WP:F File:Doubletitle.jpg. AldezD (talk) 03:18, 17 April 2020 (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:2NE1 - I Am the Best (alternate cover).jpeg

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: Change license to {{Non-free album cover}}. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The English-language alternative cover of a K-pop song "I Am the Best", taken from Apple.com, is currently labelled as "PD-ineligible-USonly". However, compared to the gallery from c:COM:TOO US, I can assume that the alternative cover art has sufficient artistic merit warranting US copyright protection. The text appears stylized, if not written, resembling the writing in a large, thick style of a chalk. Also, the background doesn't look plain, simple, or common. Rather, even with dark color(s), the background appears to have some kind of texture all over and does not appear smooth but rough. If the layout doesn't make the image original enough, then it may be ineligible for US copyright. If ineligible for US copyright, then it doesn't have to abide to WP:NFCC, does it? On the other hand, if deemed un-free and not complicit with NFCC, especially the "minimal number of items" (#3a) and "contextual significance" (#8), then this image (the alternative cover) should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 07:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to {{Non-free album cover}} - disagree that this satisfies the TOO for the USA. Logos need to be sufficiently creative to be copyrighted and the stylistic choice to use chalk, the positioning of the letters relative to everything else on the cover, and the handwriting are creative enough to be possibly copyrighted. I also disagree that this is generic handwriting, and unless if sufficient copyright explanation can be given as to why this is "below the threshold of originality" or meets the criteria for "fair use", I think it should be deleted. A a s i m 09:38, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You favor relicensing, but you also favor deleting the image if the use is not "fair use". Why deletion? George Ho (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking about if they meet the WP:NFCC. Sorry I posted that at 2 in the morning, but hope that clears up any misunderstanding. A a s i m 18:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seems like a consensus for relicencing (by the low participation standards of FFD, that is), but it's not clear if it can be kept under WP:NFCC.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One question, Awesome Aasim: do you think the image complies with the NFCC? --George Ho (talk) 22:04, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It probably does, that is why I support relicensing. There is no free equivalent, the image is not being used in a manner that would replace the original market role, there is minimal usage, this was previously displayed outside on music programs, this is encyclopedic (for identification), it does not violate media-specific policy, it is being used in at least one article, it has contextual significance because it serves as identification, it is only being used in articles, and the image description page is about to be updated to have a valid fair use rationale. A a s i m 23:01, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to {{Non-free album cover}}, I agree that the current license is incorrect. You can tell from the two T's and E's that this is not a typeface being used. If it were me, I would provide seven days under {{Nrd}} to attempt to create a valid rationale, but based on current usage it is not something that I could do as it would exceed WP:NFCCP#3a. ★ Bigr Tex 04:16, 1 July 2020 (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:Flag of East Sister Independent States.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: delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a real country. Copyright has issues (or is the uploader the designer of a nation's flag?). WMSR (talk) 21:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A real country. I am the copyright holder and release the image under the license listed. Whodoeswhatnow (talk) 21:53, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the licence could be easily changed to "PD-simple" and it would still be within the public domain. Salavat (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per G3. The nominator was wrong to remove the CSD tag and then open this nomination. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 17:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seepdy delete not actually a country, no notability and unencyclopedic Zoozaz1 (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @MelanieN: @Fastily: is there a particular reason why you are declining the CSD nominations other than the discussion here? This isn't a case of encyclopedic material being wrongfully tagged, this is self-promotion of a micronation that hasn't received any coverage in sources.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 16:18, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy tag used was WP:G3, "hoax". I was unable to determine via searching whether this was a pure hoax or merely a disputed entity, so I felt that decision should be made via discussion. That's what FFD is for. Of course, there is nothing to prevent the discussants here from snow-closing this discussion as delete, if justified by the input received. Otherwise there is no harm in letting the discussion run its course -- MelanieN (talk) 16:31, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MelanieN: Thank you for your reply. The only references to this micronation which this user has provided anywhere are links to a self-published webpage and I have been unable to find any other evidence of the micronation's existence. This isn't Liberland we're talking about here. Would WP:G11 be a better criterion?--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 16:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G11? For a file?? Here's where I come from: speedy deletion is a decision made by one person, kind of acting as God with regard to that article. Most of the time I can zap the article with no problem. But I take the responsibility seriously; most of us do. I do make sure the tag is justified, and I am particularly careful with G3, the hoax tag - which I see misapplied to real things about 20% of the time. If I have doubts, and if there is already a discussion going on, I would rather defer to the discussion. Apparently Fastily felt the same way. What's the big rush, anyhow? This process will only take a few more days. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC) P.S. Is there some reason YOU haven't !voted in this discussion yet? Your voice would add weight. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The image was uploaded by someone claiming that East Sister Island, which is an uninhabited nature reserve, had successfully seceded from Canada. The uploader further claimed to be a representative of the "government" of the supposed breakaway state. This is a hoax. --WMSR (talk) 21:06, 22 April 2020 (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:Khoya khoya chand 5.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already one non-free image in the film infobox. Another non-free image not needed in the music section. Titodutta (talk) 22:58, 17 April 2020 (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:David Tamil songs.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 ⚡ 02:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already one non-free image in the infobox. Does not follow the minimal usage criteria #3a. Regards. Titodutta (talk) 23:43, 17 April 2020 (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.