Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 October 26

< October 25	October 27 >

October 26

File:Oasis 1997.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. Whpq (talk) 00:52, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC: we have lots of free media of this band: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Oasis_(musical_group) ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:48, 26 October 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:Lach-World.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. Ixfd64 (talk) 03:16, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal files, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 01:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:20, 29 October 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:Queensland Labor 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: convert to {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}. ✗plicit 06:30, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is making the main Australian Labor Party logo PD and this not PD? They have the same layout except with the Queensland Labor logo having extra "Queensland" text. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Australia has a much lower threshold of originality than the United States. However, I do think this could be relicensed to {{PD-ineligible-USonly|Australia}} as it's a relatively simple logo. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should the main ALP logo be booted off Commons due to its similar design to this? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unless it can be proven the logo is in public domain for other reasons. Ixfd64 (talk) 01:08, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ixfd64: Can you nominate the federal main ALP logo on Commons to be transferred to the English Wikipedia? I believe you're experienced with Commons nomination processes. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:23, 29 October 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:Teako1994.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. Whpq (talk) 11:23, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, only used in Teako170, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 03:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:21, 29 October 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:TeamLyndhurst1.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. Whpq (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, only used in Gary Anderton, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 03:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:21, 29 October 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:TeamNee.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. Whpq (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, used in Band nee, Band Nee, and The Band Nee, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 03:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:21, 29 October 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:Sokun Taing.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. Whpq (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, never used, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 07:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:21, 29 October 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.

Bladerunner images

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. ✗plicit 14:15, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free images used in infoboxes for items in List of Blade Runner characters. Use is decorative and fails WP:NFCC#8. See WP:NFLISTS. -- Whpq (talk) 13:02, 26 October 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:Mediatrixlipa.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 ⚡ 01:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source page at Flickr indicates "All rights reserved." License history shows that this image was never released under a free license. Only used in user space. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 07:23, 29 October 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:Dido Safe Trip Home.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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced with File:Safe Trip Home.jpg on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 07:23, 29 October 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:Sbraghunathacharya.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: Convert to non-free -FASTILY 06:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image does not appear to be an actual photograph. Rather, it appears to be a photograph of a picture from a magazine or similar. Thus it is likely to be a copyright violation. To regularise the licencing WP:VRT should be used, otherwise I submit that it needs to be deleted. The question of copyright ownership is a vital one to answer. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to non-free biog-pic and add a fair use given the subject is dead. Salavat (talk) 07:24, 29 October 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:Graf1936.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 ⚡ 01:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Physical ownership of a photograph does not make one the copyright holder. However, it's worth investigating whether {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} applies as this image is about 86 years old. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can the photographer be identified?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:29, 26 October 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.