Wikipedia:Files for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:Files for deletion)
Jump to: navigation, search

Files for discussion (FfD) is for listing images and other media files which are unneeded or have either free content or non-free content usage concerns. Files that have been listed here for more than 7 days are eligible for either deletion or removal from pages if either a consensus to do so has been reached or no objections to deletion or removal have been raised. To quote the non-free content criteria, "it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created." For undeletion requests, first contact the administrator who deleted the file. If you are unable to resolve the issue with that administrator, the matter should be brought to deletion review.

Examples of what files you may request for deletion or change here:

  • Obsolete – The file has been replaced by a better version.
  • Orphan – The file is not used on any pages in Wikipedia.
  • Unencyclopedic – The file doesn't seem likely to be useful in any Wikimedia project.
  • Low quality – The file is of an extremely low resolution, distorted, or has other physical image quality concerns.
  • Copyright violation – The file might be used in violation of copyright.
  • Possibly unfree – The file is tagged with a freeness claim, but may actually be eligible for copyright in the United States.
  • NFCC violation – The file is used under a claim of fair use but does not meet the requirements.
  • NFCC applied to free image – The file is used under a claim of fair use, but the file is either too simple, or is an image which has been wrongly labeled given evidence presented on the file description page.

If you have questions if something should be deleted, consider asking at Media Copyright Questions.

What not to list here[edit]

  1. For speedy deletion candidates, do not use this page; instead use one of the speedy deletion templates. See the criteria for speedy deletion. These are: duplicates (where both files are on Wikipedia), thumbnails, broken files, non-existent files, non-commercial, "by permission" files and files which are not an image, sound file or video clip and have no encyclopedic use.
  2. Files that have no source, have an unknown copyright, are unused or replaceable non-free, or are non-free without rationale can be marked so that they will be deleted after a week, and should not be listed on this page. Add one of the following to the file page:
    1. {{subst:nsd}} if a file has no source indicated
    2. {{subst:nld}} if a file has a source but no licensing information
    3. {{subst:orfud}} if a file has a non-free copyright tag but isn't used in any articles
    4. {{subst:rfu}} if a file has a non-free copyright tag but could be replaced by a free file
    5. {{subst:dfu|reason}} if a file has a non-free copyright tag but the rationale isn't sufficient or is disputed
    6. {{subst:frn}} if a file has no non-free use rationale
  3. Redundant or duplicate files do not have to be listed here. Please use
    1. {{isd|Full name of file excluding the "File:" prefix}} for speedy deletion if the other file is on Wikipedia, not on Commons
    2. {{now commons|File:NEW FILENAME}} if the file now exists on Commons, or {{now commons}} for files with the same name on Commons. (Don't nominate protected images, they are usually locally uploaded and protected since they are used in an interface message or in a highly used template, thus they are high-risk.)
  4. For blatant copyright infringements, use speedy deletion by tagging the file {{db-f9}}
  5. If a file is listed as public domain or under a free license, but lacks verification of this (either by an OTRS ticket number or a notice on the source website), tag it as {{subst:npd}}.
  6. Files that are hosted on Wikimedia Commons cannot be deleted via this process. Please use the Commons deletion page instead.
  7. Description pages with no local file, even though they are in the file namespace, should not be listed here.
    1. Redirects should be treated as in any other namespace: if no speedy deletion criteria apply, they should be listed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.
    2. Local description pages for files hosted on Commons are usually speedy-deletable under criterion F2; use {{db-nofile}}.
    3. Local description pages with no associated file are speedy-deletable under criterion G8; use {{db-imagepage}}.
    4. Any other deletion of a description page with no local file should be listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
  8. If a file is appropriately licensed and could be usable elsewhere, consider copying it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of listing it for deletion. Once copied to the Commons, it is eligible for speedy deletion per criterion 8 for files.
  9. If you are the uploader of the image, tag it with {{db-author}}.

Instructions for listing files for discussion

To list a file:

1
Edit the file page.

Add {{ffd|log=2016 July 31}} to the file page.

2
Create its FfD subsection.

Follow this edit link and list the file using {{subst:ffd2|File_name.ext|Uploader= |Reason= }} ~~~~

Leave the subject heading blank.

If the file has been replaced by another file, name the file that replaced it in your reason for deletion. Refer below for a list of other common reasons.

For listing additional files with the same reason, edit the first file section and use {{subst:ffd2a|File_name.ext|Uploader= }} for each additional file. Also, add {{ffd|log=2016 July 31}} to the top of the file page of each file other than the first one nominated.

3
Give due notice.

Inform the uploader by adding a message to their talk page using {{subst:fdw|File_name.ext}}

  • Remember to replace "File_name.ext" with the name of the image or media
  • For multiple images by the same user, use {{subst:fdw-multi|First_file.ext|Second_file.ext|Third_file.ext}} ~~~~ (can handle up to 26)

If the image is in use, also consider adding {{ffdc|File_name.ext|log=2016 July 31}} to the caption(s), or adding a notice to the article talk pages. Consider also notifying relevant WikiProjects of the discussion.

State the reasons why the file should be deleted, removed, or altered. Also, state what specific action should be taken, preferably in bold text; this allows discussion participants and closers to better understand the purpose of the nomination. Some examples of nomination statements include:

  • Delete. Orphaned with no foreseeable encyclopedic usage.
  • Delete. Replaced by File:FILE2.
  • Free (public domain) file may actually be eligible for copyright in the United States. This photograph was actually first published in 1920, not 1926.
  • Remove from ARTICLE1 and ARTICLE2. The file only meets WP:NFCC#8 with its use in ARTICLE3.
  • Non-free file may actually be free. This logo does not seem to meet the threshold of originality to be eligible for copyright in the United States and should actually be tagged free using {{PD-logo}}.


Some common reasons for deletion or removal from pages are:

  • Obsolete - The file has been replaced by a better version. Indicate the new file name (often abbreviated OB)
  • Orphan - The file is not used on any pages in Wikipedia. (If the file is only available under "fair use", please use {{subst:orfud}} instead). Please consider moving "good" free licensed files to Commons rather than outright deleting them, other projects may find a use for them even if we have none; you can also apply {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} . (often abbreviated OR, not to be confused with original research which generally doesn't apply to images)
  • Unencyclopedic - The file doesn't seem likely to be useful in this encyclopedia (or for any Wikimedia project). Images used on userpages should generally not be nominated on this basis alone unless the user is violating the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policy by using Wikipedia to host excessive amounts unencyclopedic material (most commonly private photos). (often abbreviated UE)
  • Low quality - The image is of an extremely low resolution, distorted, or has other physical image quality concerns. (often abbreviated LQ)
  • Copyright violation - The file might be used in violation of copyright. (often abbreviated CV)
  • Possibly unfree file - The file marked as free may actually be non-free. If the file is determined to be non-free, then it will be subject to the non-free content criteria in order to remain on Wikipedia.
  • Non-free file issues - The non-free file may not meet all requirements outlined in the non-free file use policy, or may not be necessary to retain on Wikipedia or specific articles due to either free alternatives or better non-free alternative(s) existing.
  • File marked as non-free may actually be free - The file is marked non-free, but may actually be free content. (Example: A logo may not eligible for copyright alone because it is not original enough, and thus the logo is considered to be in the public domain.)

These are not the only "valid" reasons to discuss a file. Any properly explained reason can be used. The above list comprises the most common and uncontroversial ones.

Since abbreviated deletion reasons will not be familiar to most Wikipedians, especially newbies, please consider using full words. A few extra keystrokes now can save paragraphs of explanation to a panicked uploader wondering what's wrong with their image.

If you remove a file from an article, list the article from which you removed it so there can be community review of whether the file should be deleted. This is necessary because file pages do not remember the articles on which the file were previously used.

Administrator instructions

Contents

Instructions for discussion participation[edit]

In responding to the deletion nomination, consider adding your post in the format
* '''View''' - Reasoning ... -- ~~~~
where "Delete", "Keep", "Comment", or something else may replace "View". In posting their reasoning, many editors use abbreviations and cite to the following:

Remember that polling is not a substitute for discussion. Wikipedia's primary method of determining consensus is through editing and discussion, not voting. Although editors occasionally use straw polls in an attempt to test for consensus, polls or surveys sometimes impede rather than assist discussion. They should be used with caution, and are no more binding than any other consensus decision.

Also remember that if you believe that an image is potentially useful for other projects and should be moved to Wikimedia Commons, in lieu of responding '''Move to Commons''', you can move it there yourself. See Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons for instructions.

Instructions for closing discussions[edit]

Nominations should be processed for closing after being listed for 7 days following the steps here.

Old discussions[edit]

The following discussions are more than 7 days old and are pending processing by an administrator:

For older nominations, see the archives.

Discussions approaching conclusion

Recent nominations[edit]

July 25[edit]

File:Richard Daniel Roman.jpg[edit]

File:Richard Daniel Roman.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fcbcn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Overwritten file; the second file only is up for deletion. See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Richard Daniel Roman.jpg Magog the Ogre (t c) 03:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Nuru, Ghanaian rapper.jpg[edit]

File:Nuru, Ghanaian rapper.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Itspoojkins (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Promotional photo, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 06:27, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Evan Bayh (1).jpg[edit]

File:Evan Bayh (1).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tuliptoes (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Delete - unused file, low resolution. The lack of metadata and limited contrib history of uploader indicates this might not be the uploader's own work. Kelly hi! 08:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:AlexNuttallMP.jpg[edit]

File:AlexNuttallMP.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dinozone (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

ND clause is incompatible with Wikipedia. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:ArsiNamiNeverbelonelyleviwhalen.jpeg[edit]

File:ArsiNamiNeverbelonelyleviwhalen.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Easyheartforyou (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I fail to see how an album cover is CC without additional sourcing/ OTRS Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Thorium half sandwich.png[edit]

File:Thorium half sandwich.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Double sharp (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Referral as the source listed is a recent textbook, Current license is PD-simple, and as this is a structural diagram I'd like a second opinion. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I see there is a license specifically for structural diagrams: {{PD-chem}}. Changed it to that one. Double sharp (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep Structural diagrams are PD-ineligible -FASTILY 04:04, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Nasuni logo.png[edit]

File:Nasuni logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Exdejesus (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is a logo, but license is CC-BY. Is this actually a simple logo? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I don't understand the possibilities. This is the company logo. It is a registered trademark. The company is granting rights to use the logo, so long as such usage doesn't infringe the trademark. Should it have a different kind of license? Thanks. Exdejesus (talk) 12:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

The concern was that one of 'threshold of originality', i.e it wasn't complex enough to be copyright. If the logo woners is releasing it, don't forget to send the paperwork to OTRS. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

okay, thanks! I'll have to look into that. Do you think it's okay to use as is? Until I figure out this end of it? Thanks.Exdejesus (talk) 12:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Tiny-olive-stone-boat-chen-tsu-chang.jpg[edit]

File:Tiny-olive-stone-boat-chen-tsu-chang.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Big Wang (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The art maybe old, but this appears to be a staged/lit photo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

July 26[edit]

File:RID 1950.jpg[edit]

File:RID 1950.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rikker04 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

1950+50 year term =2000 which post dates URAA, however I am not seeing much in the image which is copyrightable, other than the crest. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:53, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's too risky for de minimis: The side of the book with the crest seems to be a key part of the image, seeing as it identifies the cover.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:38, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 19:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:SCPh Justice Arturo Brion Official Portrait.jpg[edit]

File:SCPh Justice Arturo Brion Official Portrait.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hornbookph (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is not directly on source stated. This would however appear to be an official portrait, Are Phillipine Govt images PD? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

They are non-free on Wikipedia ({{Non-free Philippines government}}) but public domain on Commons ({{PD-PhilippinesGov}}). This is a problem which needs to be solved, but I'm not sure how to solve it. Not sure how to solve it, though. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: see other relisted discussion on Philippines gov copyright
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 18:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Copra workers 1948.jpg[edit]

File:Copra workers 1948.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Lester (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This post dates the 1946 cut-off for a 50 year term to 1996 (URAA date). However, it's claimed it's a "Commonwealth" image. Is there an OTRS on file about the Australian Govt not asserting copyright in the US on expired images? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 17:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • There is such an email for the UK and an OTRS for Canada, if memory serves. Nothing about Australia, though. Also, the source information is fairly vague.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Flag of The President Of The Philippines (1946).png[edit]

File:Flag of The President Of The Philippines (1946).png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by National Names 2000 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File is uploaded as non-free, but I'm not sure if it should be public domain (PD) instead. Many similar files have been uploaded to Commons as PD (c:Category:Presidential Standard of the Philippines) including a free version of this file as c:File:Presidential Standard of the Philippines (1946-1948).svg. If the file needs to be uploaded locally to Wikipedia as non-free, then it's current use in Flag of the President of the Philippines#Historical uses fails WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 (WP:NFG) and the file should be removed and replaced with the Commons version. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:39, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

  • The problem is that we have a copyright tag, {{Non-free Philippines government}}, which says that files like this are unfree whereas Commons has a copyright tag, {{PD-PhilippinesGov}}, which says that the same files are in the public domain. If the file is unfree, then the use needs to comply with WP:NFCC, but if it is free, then its use is not restricted by WP:NFCC, and I'm not sure if we can determine what's correct without help from an expert on Philippines copyright law. On a related note, there are a couple of Philippines Government seals which are used outside the article namespace, but since I'm not sure if they are free or unfree, I'm not sure if I should remove them from those pages per WP:NFCC#9 or not. For the moment, I've left those files alone. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Until it's proven that they are free, we are to treat them as if they are unfree. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
      • This image is from malacanang.gov.ph (Presidential Museum and Library - Biography of Pres. Manuel Roxas) and is in public domain. The website states below, "All content is in the public domain unless otherwise stated." --J-Ronn (talk) 07:49, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
        • Just as Wikipedia and Commons are confused by the contradictory tags {{Non-free Philippines government}} / {{PD-PhilippinesGov}}, it's possible that the government website from which the image comes also is confused by the confusing law. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
          • That's true, but it's a rather cynical view that the Philippine Presidential Museum (or the Office of the President for that matter, given that the website hosts the same message and similar content) has poorer understanding of the Philippine copyright law than a bunch of Wikipedians. In general, we don't assume that people who license stuff have no understanding about licensing. By that logic, every CC-BY picture from Flickr is potentially a copyvio because users are confused by law (say, the elementary fact that copyright is exclusive to the copyright holder; because let's face it most people, even Flickr users have no idea about copyright). I think we should assume that rather than being confused by, the Philippine government is abiding by the law. If there is someone who should be assumed to know the law, it's the executive office that is tasked with implementing legislation. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
        • Keep PD per above. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: needs clearer consensus: see also commons:Template talk:PD-PhilippinesGov for previous discussions
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 16:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Charles W. Sandman plaque.jpg[edit]

File:Charles W. Sandman plaque.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by LeadSongDog (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Simple text? Not seeing any major non-tirival gemoetric elements either. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree there are no significant graphic elements. I was unsure what copyright tag to use on it: I snapped the photo myself, but had nothing to do with the plaque, I just spotted it in passing. If there's a better tag, please feel free to change it. LeadSongDog come howl! 15:41, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete No evidence of permission from the person who wrote the text on the sign. Fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Have you looked at Blue_plaque? It seems rather obvious this is not only a fair use, but an intended use of a historic plaque. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
It's irrelevant if it is valid fair use under copyright law or not. The article does not need an image of a non-free plaque and can easily be understood without one, see WP:NFCC#8. Additionally, the file fails WP:NFCC#1 (per WP:FREER), WP:NFCC#10a and WP:NFCC#10c. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll ask again, have you looked at Blue plaque? Or the corresponding image category? There is wide use of this sort of image in articles about the people, places, or events discussed on such plaques. LeadSongDog come howl! 13:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • @LeadSongDog: Can you add a copyright tag to the file, please? Merely mentioning it in the information template is not enough. I think it is supposed to be something like {{self|GFDL}}. @Stefan2: Seems like the plaque may fall under {{PD-US-1989}} - the date indicated is 1986 and public works of art often display the dedication/publication date, which is very plausible here. I don't see a copyright tag, either, but I don't know anything on how to find out about copyright registration. So requesting that this file not be deleted until the registration question is cleared up.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Tagged, I hope correctly. Thanks to BigrTex for helping sort this out and to Redrose64 for solving the template behavior mystery. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: needs copyright status check on the sign's text
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 16:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • According to Clindberg (or Clindbergh) on Commons the publication date only applies to the text - apparently "published" artworks don't count as "published" under copyright. Assuming that the sign itself isn't copyrightable (it's too simple, most likely) and only the text is, that should not be a problem. Still don't know how to find the copyright registrations, but basic searches didn't indicate anything obvious.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:59, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Looking south east at The Lincoln Monument of Wabash, Indiana by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg[edit]

File:Looking south east at The Lincoln Monument of Wabash, Indiana by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Looking west at The Lincoln Monument of Wabash, Indiana by Charles Keck. Photo taken on August 2, 2008.jpg[edit]

File:Looking west at The Lincoln Monument of Wabash, Indiana by Charles Keck. Photo taken on August 2, 2008.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:The Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg[edit]

File:The Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Back of the Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg[edit]

File:Back of the Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Note: The description says the sculpture was modeled in 1922. Geo Swan (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    That is not the same thing as publication, though. Back then, the unveiling in 1934 would have been. Then again, {{PD-US-no notice}} is likely to apply in that case, unless there is a copyright notice.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:20, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Detail of the Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg[edit]

File:Detail of the Lincoln Monument of Hingham, MA by Charles Keck. Photo from the SIRIS web page..jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Note: The description says the sculpture was modeled in 1922. Geo Swan (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    That is not the same thing as publication, though. Back then, the unveiling in 1934 would have been publication I think. Then again, {{PD-US-no notice}} is likely to apply in that case, unless there is a copyright notice.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:20, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sculpture of Reubn Eaton by Bryant Baker 1934.jpg[edit]

File:Sculpture of Reubn Eaton by Bryant Baker 1934.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Can someone see a copyright notice anywhere? My impression is that works of art from that time almost never have them. Otherwise it may fall under {{PD-US-no notice}}, and before 1978 putting it up in public would equal publication from my understanding of the matter.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:18, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sculpture of Reubn Eaton by Bryant Baker 1934 Long View.jpg[edit]

File:Sculpture of Reubn Eaton by Bryant Baker 1934 Long View.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by RichardMcCoy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is no FOP for 3D works in the US; derivative of non-free content (statue) FASTILY 05:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Can someone see a copyright notice anywhere? My impression is that works of art from that time almost never have them. Otherwise it may fall under {{PD-US-no notice}}, and before 1978 putting it up in public would equal publication from my understanding of the matter.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:17, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Logo of 2016 AMJHC.jpg[edit]

File:Logo of 2016 AMJHC.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wikiupdater1997 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Claimed as FAL, but text states - "No other edited version allowed for use." which is an ND term. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Hughie Gallacher.jpg[edit]

File:Hughie Gallacher.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bornintheguz (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is an apparently free photo of this footballer at Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Fort Massac River Side.jpg[edit]

File:Fort Massac River Side.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Chitt66 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

No indication of copyright status at source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

The sourcewiki (where it is an "own work" upload) doesn't have individual licenses for the files but has one for the wiki content, CC-BY-SA 3.0. I suppose it applies to files as well, there is no legal requirement for both to have separate licenses.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Unplag Dashboard screenshot.png[edit]

File:Unplag Dashboard screenshot.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by CdoggyCreep (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Querying why this is under non-free when Commons has an OTRS confirmed screenshot? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Maybe because the OTRS only applies to that specific screenshot? You may want to ask on commons:COM:OTRS/Noticeboard.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:2012 BWF logo.svg[edit]

File:2012 BWF logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Aleenf1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Near identical duplicate is on Commons, but it's not an exact match. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:31, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Copyrighted material allow to upload in Commons? --Aleenf1 13:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
The logo here may be below threshold of originality. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:01, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Armagedon.jpg[edit]

File:Armagedon.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EDGARTISTA (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused, Album cover? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Fasoracetam.png[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 RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT 01:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Fasoracetam.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mykhal (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused, Commons has a slightly larger structural diagram from the chemical concerned (assuming it's accurate). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I have accepted the inivitation to this discussion, thank you for the correctness. I agree that the image is unused, it's a fact. Feel free to delete it. Or what is the point? --Mykhal (talk) 09:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
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:Joan McKowen.jpg[edit]

File:Joan McKowen.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Orion 2012 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free image of deceased person being used in Joan McKowen and Joan McKowen Memorial Trophy. Use in "Joan McKowen" seems acceptable per No. 10 of WP:NFCI, but the file lacks the separate, specific non-free use rationale required by WP:NFCC#10c. Images of deceased individuals are generally considered NFCC compliant in stand-alone articles about the individuals themselves, but usage in other articles is generally not allowed unless there is a strong contextual reason for doing so. The file's use in "Joan McKowen Memorial Trophy" does have a non-free use rationale, but this particular use seems decorative and not needed per WP:NFCC#8. Suggest keep for Joan McKowan (as long as WP:NFCC#10c is satisfied) and remove from the trophy article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Tom Holland at the 2016 San Diego Comic-Con International.jpg[edit]

File:Tom Holland at the 2016 San Diego Comic-Con International.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JerickHerick35 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Copyrighted image of living individual. Image could be obtained by other means. For example, someone in the audience at that panel who photographed him themself. Ebyabe talk - Attract and Repel ‖ 19:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NFCC#1. Individual is still alive so there's not reason to assume that a freely licensed image to serve the same encyclopedic purpose cannot be created by someone. Moreover, there is nothing specific or unique about this particular photo that would possible justify non-free use even if the image was not being used in the main infobox for identification purposes per WP:NFCC#8. File should probably be tagged for speedy deletion with Template:di-replaceable fair use per WP:F7 since this type of non-free usage is almost always never allowed. Also, if this is really a Getty Image as the meta data claims, then it is also not allowed per No. 7 of WP:NFC#UUI and should be tagged with {{db-f7}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:35, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

July 27[edit]

File:Soad Hosny's Birth Certificate.jpg[edit]

File:Soad Hosny's Birth Certificate.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Arab Cowboy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

No source, and no details of original publication, clearly an official document, the uploader is NOT the author of the original. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: is source needed at least for authenticity?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 03:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:20091104 Alisa Weilerstein - Kodály's Sonata for Solo Cello, Op. 8 - 3. Allegro molto vivace.ogg[edit]

File:20091104 Alisa Weilerstein - Kodály's Sonata for Solo Cello, Op. 8 - 3. Allegro molto vivace.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by TonyTheTiger (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Missing evidence that the performer released this performance into the public domain. Kelly hi! 07:39, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Also applies to File:20091104 Alisa Weilerstein - Kodály's Sonata for Solo Cello, Op. 8 - 3. Allegro molto vivace.ogv. Kelly hi! 07:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
  • We are dealing with three works here: the composition by Kodály, the performance by Weilerstein, and the video by a Whitehouse employee (which is a derivative work of the two). Works by Whitehouse employees are in the public domain, but I'd assume they can't license the composition or the performance. We do not know for sure which works the notice on the website, "public domain", pertains to. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
    • The performances are always PD at Whitehouse.gov. For some reason the compositions seem to be too. We went through this at WP:FS when it existed. In fact, the licensing has been reviewed by the experts there.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
      • I'm curious. Can you find the discussion, TonyTheTiger? – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
        • Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Kodály's Sonata for Solo Cello suggests that you may want to talk to Adam Cuerden or Graham87 for an explanation.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
          • Nothing in the discussion indicates the artist released her performance to the public domain. Kelly hi! 20:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
            • They are working for the Federal Government at the time of performance. ALL works by employees of the Federal Government are out of copyright - see Template:PD-USGov. The work itself is from 1915, hence is out of copyright in the U.S., as indicated. Speedy keep. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
              • Performing for the President doesn't make an artist a Federal employee. Kelly hi! 22:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
                • For example, Korean War Veterans Memorial#United States postage stamp court case shows that making something for the government doesn't automatically put it in the public domain – it's only PD if you are employed by the government. The performers might not be employees but contractors. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
                  • NWhatever the reason, the government says this video is out of copyright. [1] says "public domain" explicitly, without any ambiguity. I presume no-one's actually checked the source link yet; this should have beebn done before nominating it here, as it's entirely unambiguous and would have prevented a bad nomination. We can close this. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:39, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
                    • The White House can release their recording into the public domain, but the artist retains copyright over her performance. Kelly hi! 08:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
                      • Information on government websites is not necessarily correct. See for example c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:F-35B Lightning II Completes First Land-based Ski Jump Launch 150619-D-AW822-318.jpg. There we have a photo taken by the employee of a private company. The government hosts it on its website and claims that it is in the public domain, but the photographer has uploaded the photo as unfree to Flickr, where the copyright is attributed to the photographer's employer. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:38, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
                        • It is, frankly, your job to prove them wrong, not my job to prove the government correct. The default presumption is PD-USGov barring evidence to the contrary. I'm not even entirely sure that there are performance copyrights under US law, if the underlying work is not modified and the performance is in public. Can you please quote the exact section of the copyright law you think grants such rights? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:03, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
                          • And in this case, the default is to assume that it's not PD-USGov. It's too much trouble to get a musician to sign a contract saying that she's an employee of the government and then signing another document afterwards saying that she's fired if she's only making a single performance. It's much more likely that she signed another kind of contract which makes her a contractor and works of contractors are not PD-USGov. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
NO. The default is to presume the reliable source saying it's PD is correct. Also, you didn't answer the question about copyright law. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The default is to assume that the United States Government doesn't make great effort to use extra bureaucracy. In this case, that means that the default is to assume that the woman wasn't an employee but a contractor. There are plenty of situations where government websites state that something is in the public domain without it actually being in the public domain. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I seem to recall that there was a photograph of Maya Angelou reciting a poem at the inauguration of Bill Clinton that ended up deleted, and that had been listed as PD-USGov. User:Figureskatingfan, do you have any links to discussions which may prove pertinent here? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
I remember that one. It was mislabelled by NPR as being an official photo; it wasn't from a governmental site. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't know how this pertains to this discussion, but Adam is correct. The original image, which was used widely in most articles about Angelou, was deleted by Commons because it was mislabeled, as stated on Adam's talk page [2]. We were able to get a replacement, though, after making a request to the Clinton Library, which donated a similar image in color. Also see this discussion on my talk page. [3] Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I was thinking it could have been a work for hire; I didn't follow the discussion all too closely. Another case where a work for hire was deleted was an image of an astronaut, taken for NASA by an outside photographer. I don't remember the name of the file or who was depicted (hence why I asked about Angelou). My point is that there have been cases where works taken by an outsider for the US government have been deleted. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:58, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @Crisco 1492: In any case, they're never deleted by default with no evidence whatsoever but base and unfounded speculation. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:12, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Agree. But deletion does happen, even when the image is hosted on a US government website. I can't figure out how things are working in this case, however. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @Crisco 1492: Basically, people are.. deciding thatthere's A. a performer's copyright under US law (and that they don't need to prove it), and B. Presuming that they know better than the U.S. government who actually got the person to perform what might be in the details of them getting the person to perform that could affect the copyright status. It's basically all speculation and panic about how it might be in copyright because of imaginary reasons without the slightest bit of evidentiary backing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:00, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
  • For A, the US copyright office defines the holder of the copyright over a recording as "the performer(s) whose performance is fixed, or the record producer who processes the sounds and fixes them in the final recording, or both." So, in other words, it's quite possible the performer maintains a claim of copyright (though it is likewise possible that the performer doesn't). As I said, I think this is a very gray area, and as such I'm not willing to give a "keep" or a "delete" vote. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
It is a gray area indeed. I did some reading (references upon request) and turns out performances are eligible for copyright. A performance is a derivative work of the composition. I found differing opinions on whether it is possible to perform a work at all without creating a derivative work (say, even a rigorous note by note performance still entails artistic interpretation and invariably the choice of instrumentation). This is further complicated by the fact that the recording is also a derivative work of the performance. This is where it gets particularly tricky, because the U.S. copyright law on one hand has special provisions for derivative works that are audio recordings (esp. concerning transferability). On the other hand, the law has confusing definitions of what an audio recording is (we are dealing with a video, which may not be an audio recording in the legal sense). There are too many what-if's both ways for someone who is not an intellectual property lawyer to conclude whether this is a copyrightable derivative work. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 08:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete The person who posted this on the White House website is not likely to have thought through the copyright issues extremely thoroughly. According to the legislative history of the relevant copyright law about audio recordings, "The copyrightable elements in a sound recording will usually, though not always, involve 'authorship' both on the part of the performers whose performance is captured and on the part of the record producer responsible for setting up the recording session, capturing and electronically processing the sounds, and compiling and editing them to make the final sound recording. ... As in the case of motion pictures, the bill does not fix the authorship, or the resulting ownership, of sound recordings, but leaves these matters to the employment relationship and bargaining among the interests involved."[4] Here, essentially only if there was a contract between the performer and the federal government making her a federal employee (extremely doubtful for a one-night performance) would the performer's contribution be in the public domain. I suppose there also could have been a term in her contract that any performance would be released into the public domain but that seems like an extremely unusual term to have in a contract. Note that if an artist creates a work for the federal government on contract, the federal government can actually own a copyright on it because the copyright can be transferred to the federal government. I just don't think a blanket "public domain" statement on the website is sufficient here. Government websites are wrong about copyright all the time. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I consider this argument nonsense; an attempt to limit the public domain by pure speculation. You don't know what arrangements were made, but are quite happy to list specific possibilities that might suit your view, maybe. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think this should be relisted but I'm getting a script error right now so maybe later. I wanted to add that we've deleted many White House videos from Commons, including performances of material from Hamilton (the musical) and a video introduction to Merrick Garland. They were listed as in the public domain but the WH did not do due diligence to the composition copyright (in the first example) and to the source material (photos and materials from Garland's early life, in the second example). Can't give WH carte blanche on multimedia. czar 19:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: could use wider input on performance copyright
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 03:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per Calliopejen1. The performers' rights don't seem to have been taken into consideration. File is missing evidence of permission at best -FASTILY 04:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Graham87 can you please comment here regarding this WP:FS file.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:15, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    • I don't want to get involved in this at all. Graham87 06:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • May I remind everyone that the White House staff can be completely unreliable on intellectual property issues around official photographs, Back in 2011, a newspaper whose audience were extremely orthodox believers, who thought no image of a woman should ever be published, went to the trouble of photoshopping Hilary Clinton out of the image of Obama's office, in the photo of his cabinet listening to the SEALs assassinating Osama bin Laden. Officials at the White House admonished this small publication, for, as I recall, "using white house images in an unauthorized fashion." They threatened the paper with never being allowed to use any White House photos in future. The photo in question was taken by an official photographer, so it was unquestionably public domain, and the newspaper could have given Hilary a hitler mustache, or devil horns, without requiring anyone's permission.
  • I think it is regretable that WMF projects bend over backwards in attempts to make sure we never get accused of a copyright infringement. The WMF has received about a dozen DMCA take-down notices. In most cases like this why shouldn't we keep the file, and wait for a take-down notice? Geo Swan (talk) 04:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Eg-map.gif[edit]

File:Eg-map.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Algocu (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused, near duplicate of File:Eg-map-a.gif FASTILY 01:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:UL mark.png[edit]

File:UL mark.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Latics (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused, superior version available: File:UL-EU-Prüfzeichen.TIF FASTILY 01:12, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Steelshark.jpg[edit]

File:Steelshark.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sirevil (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused personal image, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 01:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Hatshepsut (cropped).jpg[edit]

File:Hatshepsut (cropped).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JCarriker (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused crop of File:Hatshepsut.gif, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 01:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Central Texas map.PNG[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 Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT 13:06, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Central Texas map.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JCarriker (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Derivative of File:TexasCountyMap.png, which has been deleted as missing license FASTILY 01:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

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:South Africa Locator Blank.PNG[edit]

File:South Africa Locator Blank.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JCarriker (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused in mainspace, superior version available: File:South Africa blank locator map.svg FASTILY 01:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne and Tatiana 1998.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne and Tatiana 1998.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne 1975.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne 1975.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I am very unhappy to see this sort of wikilawyering going on. You have driven Jeanne, who was a wonderfully dedicated editor for many years from our project by this sort of BS. You know and I know that the photographers who snapped these pictures is never going to sue wikipedia. yet the letter of the law MUST crush the spirit of the law. Again. And we wonder why editors, good editors leave wikipedia. Ever heard of the phrase "turning a blind eye?" No? Well do so. I feel that I should repost this at all the moves to remove her pictures, and I believe that I will. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 06:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I'll respond in one place; it isn't wikilawyering to follow the law. It's actual lawyering. Past court cases have resulted in fairly clear case law that a site is no longer protected by safe haven provisions of the DMCA if they've been handed information that would lead a reasonable person to believe content they're hosting is infringing on someone's copyright. Wikipedia is a huge site, and the law of large numbers applies; if we routinely "turn a blind eye", eventually a potential plaintiff will catch wind of it, see dollar signs, and then the WMF will be staring down the barrel of a class action lawsuit or possibly law enforcement scrutiny. I'm happy to help Jeanne go through the permissions process to keep her images on Wikipedia if she knows who the photographer is and cares to do that. Her activity has not deviated in any significant amount from her norms over the past year within the past few months since her photos were first nominated for discussion, so "driving her off the project" is an extraordinarily strong way of putting things. I'm happy to help her keep these up if she's able to provide enough information to help me cover the project's ass legally. ~ Rob13Talk 06:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Please excuse me if I have overstated my case. I used to see Jeanne a lot on my watch list on other articles I watch, and now I don't. I know that this issue is not a new one, she has backed off editing in the past. Actually it is good news to hear that her editing output has not diminished. Well, do what you need to do, that is the best any of us can do, that this is real lawyering does not change my POV. Carptrash (talk) 06:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • After a moments examination of this image it was clear to me that this was a self-portrait of the uploader. Autobiographical photos used to illustrate a contributor's user page -- like this one -- are an explicit exception to the general proscription to keeping purely personal files here.
Nominator, your nomination of this image gives the very unfortunate appearance of bullying, of naked malice.
WTF did you mean with the phrase "the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload"? How does this criticism apply to an explicitly permitted self-portrait? Geo Swan (talk) 04:51, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne and cat 1979.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne and cat 1979.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne beach disco giardini naxos.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne beach disco giardini naxos.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne beach disco.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne beach disco.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Jeanne boleyn at aisha.jpg[edit]

File:Jeanne boleyn at aisha.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeanne boleyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This was recently kept at another FfD due to unclear status of the photos uploaded by this user. See Special:PermaLink/730328067, which now confirms that the user has uploaded many files on the assumption that anything taken with her camera is hers to upload. ~ Rob13Talk 01:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Magee,Mississippi in the early days.jpg[edit]

File:Magee,Mississippi in the early days.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kevin Magee 1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is a photograph of what appears to be a photo from a newspaper. Uploader claims to be the photographer but unless he also took the original photo, this is a derivative work. Whpq (talk) 02:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Port Gaverne.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: Speedy deleted as F8 (not sure why it was listed here). Miniapolis 13:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Port Gaverne.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rwimages (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Now on commons Cotton2 (talk) 09:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

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:Shani Rhys James - Studio with Gloves 1993.jpeg[edit]

File:Shani Rhys James - Studio with Gloves 1993.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by user:Jane023 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This image is licensed at source as CC-BY-NC and is an image created and reproduced in the United Kingdom. Under UK copyright law re-use of the image on Wikipedia is not permitted. Does U.S fair use overrule this? I would appreciate clarity on the legal bases for including the image on Wikipedia before making a request for deletion. Thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 10:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:'The Rabbi's Concert' by Fred A. Precht.jpg[edit]

File:'The Rabbi's Concert' by Fred A. Precht.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wmpearl (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons considered this work to be public domain. (Precht died in 1942) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:4J Studios logo.jpg[edit]

File:4J Studios logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by X201 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered too simple. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Zentyal logo.jpg[edit]

File:Zentyal logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fudnor (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Zambon logo.jpg[edit]

File:Zambon logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Domenico Emanuele Crea (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:51, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Zalman Logo.svg[edit]

File:Zalman Logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by KUsam (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate considered below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Youth Foxes.jpg[edit]

File:Youth Foxes.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Greenock125 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Below TOO? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:54, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:ABC Studios.png[edit]

File:ABC Studios.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mrschimpf (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate considered below TOO Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete, uploader endorsed. Should have simply been replaced with current version, similar outside of logo effect and nothing compelling about a keep. Nate (chatter) 19:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:ACMAT logo.jpg[edit]

File:ACMAT logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Degen Earthfast (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicated considered below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:YesAsia logo.gif[edit]

File:YesAsia logo.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fayenatic london (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered below TOO Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I know this is familiar to you, but please use links to explain things more clearly. Apparently TOO refers to WP:TOO, and the nomination has been made because a duplicate exists at Commons: Commons:File:Logo von YesAsia.gif. Given that, (as file uploader) I have no objection, assuming that you will replace the link in the article YesAsia. Thanks for the notice on my talk page. – Fayenatic London 12:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Xtend Logo Color.png[edit]

File:Xtend Logo Color.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jan.koehnlein (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Wust El-Balad-Logo.JPG[edit]

File:Wust El-Balad-Logo.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by FaWzY (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Commons duplicate is considered to be below TOO. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Rnb.jpg[edit]

File:Rnb.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Spargett (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

©2005 All Rights Reserved. conflicts with PD license claim. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:UteWarClub.jpg[edit]

File:UteWarClub.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Waya sahoni (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Upload by indefed user. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Zip Burger with Beer Battered Fries and Zip Sauce in Magee,Mississippi.jpg[edit]

File:Zip Burger with Beer Battered Fries and Zip Sauce in Magee,Mississippi.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kevin Magee 1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

A poor, out of focus shot of a burger of zilch encyclopaedic use. Fails WP:NOTIMAGE Nthep (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

July 28[edit]

File:Drwhostub-03.JPG[edit]

File:Drwhostub-03.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Angmering (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused in mainspace, blurry, possibly uploaded as a WP:POINT FASTILY 02:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:The Real Housewives of Sydney logo.png[edit]

File:The Real Housewives of Sydney logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kelege (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File is licensed as non-free content, but it seems too simple for copyright protection and more likely {{PD-logo}} or at the very least {{PD-USonly}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:43, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The Wire screenshots[edit]

File:Wire07.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jdpeck2147 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
File:TheWire21alt.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by East718 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
File:TheWireS4.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by East718 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free screenshots being used in The Wire as well as some individual episodes articles. A non-free rationale is provided for each use, but some of the uses are decorative which is not something really allowed by WP:NFCC.

The use of "File:Wire07.jpg" in One Arrest (The Wire episode) seems fine since it is being used in the main infobox as the primary means of identification for the episode. Use in the "Cast and characters" in The Wire, however, seem mainly decorative since the screenshot itself is not the subject of any sourced commentary so context required by WP:NFCC#8 is not evident. Suggest keep for the episode article, but remove from the main article.

"File:TheWire21alt.jpg" is being used in Duck and Cover (The Wire) in addition to the main article. Use in both articles seems decorative since the screenshot itself is not the subject of a sourced commentary and is not being used as the primary means of identification in either article's infobox. Suggest remove from both articles.

"File:TheWireS4.jpg" is only being used in the "Cast and characters" section of the main article. For the same reasons given above for the other two images, this type of usage appears more decorative than contextual. It's hard to see how non-free use can be justified simply for two sentences which just mention these characters in general terms, especially since each character has its own stand-alone article. Suggest remove from article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:33, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sky Cinema UK 2016 logo.png[edit]

File:Sky Cinema UK 2016 logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by John123521 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Duplicated on Commons by Commons:File:SkyCinema.pngSfan00 IMG (talk) 08:35, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, but it didn't have proper copyright--John123521 (Talk-Contib.) RA 08:46, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:HarvardStaughton.jpg[edit]

File:HarvardStaughton.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by WB2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Why is this tagged as still being in copyright outside the US? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:42, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Yogic Yang Spiral.jpg[edit]

File:Yogic Yang Spiral.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Horia.cristescu (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Claimed as self, but there seemed to be doubt expressed at Commons concerning this. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:39, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:La Cañada Real Galiana - Satellite.jpeg[edit]

File:La Cañada Real Galiana - Satellite.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sturgeontransformer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Uploader sees to consider this F9, on the basis of it having been mis-identified it as CC, However because the CSD was subst, it's not showing up as such, hence brought to FFD for a further consideration concerning fair-use. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I actually was the person who had tagged this image for speedy deletion! It was one of the images I had uploaded by mistake with what I had thought was inadequate evidence of free use copyright status. If appropriate, please go right ahead and delete it. The last thing I want is to have improperly sourced material up.
FYI, a few minutes ago I had posted an earlier comment about this image. Please ignore that comment (which I just removed, but which can be viewed on the talk history). For a second there, I thought the F9 was referring to a different map image I had used (of the same location), which I had put up as a properly sourced replacement for the image that is now up for deletion.
Apologies for any confusion! Hope this helps. And feel free to ask me any question if there are any outstanding questions :)
Best,
Sturgeontransformer (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
By the way, I am somewhat curious--how was the CC status substantiated? This was one of those images I had improperly uploaded because Google said it was fair use. When I did additional checking, I couldn't find any evidence that it was. So I am actually surprised that it was substantiated--seems strange. ::Sturgeontransformer (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturgeontransformer (talkcontribs) 19:32, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Ulsan Hyundai Mipo Dockyard.PNG[edit]

File:Ulsan Hyundai Mipo Dockyard.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Saint9016 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free former crest of the soccer club Ulsan Dolphins being used in a decorative manner in Ulsan Dolphins#Crests. Files has a non-free use rationale, but it claims that the file is needed to identify the representative team is not really correct since File:Ulsan Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Dolphin.png serves that role in the main infobox. Moreover, the particular version of the crest itself is not the subject of any sourced discussion within the article, so the context required by WP:NFCC#8 is not evident. Finally, the only difference between the logo used to identify the team in the infobox and this former version seems to be the number of stars; the rest of the logo seems identical which means there is really no reason for the reason to see both per WP:NFCC#3a and the difference in stars can be more than adequately explained using text per WP:NFCC#1. Suggest remove from article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

July 29[edit]

File:Busan I Park.png[edit]

File:Busan I Park.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fetx2002 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File is licensed as non-free and it has a non-free use rationale, but the design seems to be simple enough in my opinion to be OK to re-license as {{PD-logo}} or {{PD-USonly}}. If, however, the consensus is that the file needs to stay as non-free, then the second use of it Busan IPark#Crest does not satisfy WP:NFCCP. A non-free use rationale is only provided for the use in the main infobox, so WP:NFCC#10c is not met for use in the "Crest" section; moreover, there's no real need to use the same non-free file twice within the same article per WP:NFCC#3a. So, if the file's licensing remains as is, I suggest keep for the use in the infobox and remove for the use in the gallery of crests. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Anyang LG Cheetahs.png[edit]

File:Anyang LG Cheetahs.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fetx2002 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free former crest of FC Seoul being used in a gallery in a subsection called "Crest". File has a non-free use rationale, but usage of non-free images in galleries is generally not allowed per WP:NFG because such usage tends to me more decorative than contexutal. A source is cited for the image, but the source is in Korean so I am not sure what it says. Unless this can somehow be better incorporated into the article with content discussing this crest itself reflecting what the source says, I don't see how simply showing the image in a gallery justifies non-free use. So, I suggest remove unless the issues with WP:NFCC#8 are resolved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:03, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Please don't delete south korean football club crest files, If you can't check out informaion about file source, Because you don't read korean language. Please use google translator or ask me. I can help.
I think most files don't have problem. File source have korean lanuage information, Don't to justify deletion.Footwiks (talk) 02:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
The file wasn't nominated for discussion simply because the source is in Korean; it was nominated because in my opinion it is being used in decorative manner in a gallery which is something not allowed by WP:NFCC. If the file can be incorporated into the article where the crest is being discussed and the discussion is supported by a reliable source (regardless of the source's language), then its use probably would meet WP:NFCC#8. The discussion should be something more than a trivial mention which says the crest was used by the team at one time; it should be specifically about the crest itself, such as its meaning or elements, or something to such a degree that actually not seeing the crest would be detrimental to the reader's understanding of what is written. I can't read the cited source, but if you can and want to add the relevant content, then feel free to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Eli Lilly Industrialist.jpg[edit]

File:Eli Lilly Industrialist.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Noles1984 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

It is not clear that this image is in fact free, and it was thus tagged as "no permission" deletion by Kelly. I wonder if it can be used as fair use or if it's free for age-related reasons. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Escudo bahia blanca.JPG[edit]

File:Escudo bahia blanca.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mbertoni (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Is this a logo (in which case it may fall under commons:PD-AR-Anonymous if it was created on behalf of the government or anonymously, or {{Non-free logo}}) or a coat of arms, in which case it should be replaced with a freely licensed version seeing as the freeness of the current file was disputed by Kelly? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:20, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Ericandnancy.jpg[edit]

File:Ericandnancy.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Avalchfan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Is the license statement at http://web.archive.org/web/20060616181847/http://www.tingstadrumbel.com/contactus.htm clear enough for us? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:40, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:EU Member States’ innovation performance.jpg[edit]

File:EU Member States’ innovation performance.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Nordine merit (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The image was tagged as no permission, but the license http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:330:0039:0042:EN:PDF may be free enough for us - all depends on whether modification is permitted by that text. May be worth asking via email, perhaps? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:47, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

File:St.clare ext1a.jpg[edit]

File:St.clare ext1a.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Pfcarch (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Claimed as self, but credited to Archphoto Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

July 30[edit]

File:Tatjana Veiled Head, Tight View, Joshua Tree, 1988.jpg[edit]

File:Tatjana Veiled Head, Tight View, Joshua Tree, 1988.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by LaVicente (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

High resolution image which violates WP:NFCCP#3. Dismas|(talk) 02:35, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:EonCoat Logo.png[edit]

File:EonCoat Logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Merrickeoncoat (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Appears to be a duplicate (larger version of File:EonCoat logo.png. Both are PD Textlogo, so I would suggest a choice is made on which one to retain. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:06, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:My Great-Grandfather FWB (d. 1929).jpg[edit]

File:My Great-Grandfather FWB (d. 1929).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ekvcpa (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is a query as to why this PD-US-1923 abroad, when it seems to be a photo from what would otherwise be a PD-heirs situation ( photo possibly unpublished from a private family collection.). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:04, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Company rule trial warren hastings2.jpg[edit]

File:Company rule trial warren hastings2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fowler&fowler (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Why is this one PD-US-1923-abroad? Surely it's old enough to be PD-old? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it certainly is old enough for PD-old. Should I change it, or will you? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:23, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Done. So this can be considered Kept- with Commons Transfer Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:1930 Rockland Trust Company Hull Branch.jpg[edit]

File:1930 Rockland Trust Company Hull Branch.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Pames (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Claimed as GFDL, but there's no other sourcing for what seems to be an archive image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:1933 George Masa 800px.jpg[edit]

File:1933 George Masa 800px.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Arx Fortis (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Claimed as CC-by, but the given source seems to be a dead link. Not sure why a 1933 image would be Creative Commons, without further clarification. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:39, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

It appears I labeled it incorrectly when I uploaded it. If I understand correctly, assuming George Masa claimed copyright (which has not been established), in 1933 a photographic copyright was 28 years (unless renewed). George Masa died the same year the photo was taken, so he would not have had the opportunity to renew the copyright. Thus it appears it would have been in the public domain by 1961. Arx Fortis (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:1938craigenputtock.jpg[edit]

File:1938craigenputtock.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Profetarr (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unsourced, The file history makes a claim of own work, whilst I am willing to assume good faith on the part of the uploader, a clarification would be desirable. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:41, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:1943Derby-CountFleet-Small.jpg[edit]

File:1943Derby-CountFleet-Small.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Srca1941 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Not immediately seeing why a 1943 image would be GFDL ( vs PD not renewed.) There's no obvious link I can see between the attributed photographer and the uploader. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

The picture was taken by my 2x great uncle, Ralph Schroeder. It was previously unpublished (so far as I know) and I have the only original copies (again, so far as I know) passed down from his wife to my grandfather (her nephew) and then to me. Srca1941 (talk) 12:01, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

@Srca1941: - Thanks for the explanation. It would seem as the inheritor of the photo, you can license it how you want, although Commons now prefers Creative Commons Share Alike to GFDL. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Withdrawn - being resolved with uploader.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Irving-wsg-labouchere-burnand.jpg[edit]

File:Irving-wsg-labouchere-burnand.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tim riley (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fail to see why this is PD-US-1923-abraod, when all source images are already on Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:2008 polling bo rg.png[edit]

File:2008 polling bo rg.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Peteforsyth (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

PNG conversion of seemingly deleted JPG image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:2008-01-04 13-54-38.jpg[edit]

File:2008-01-04 13-54-38.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Poiuyt Man (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused photo, user proiile? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:16, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:2011-03-01 1946.png[edit]

File:2011-03-01 1946.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Blackash (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is a screenshot of copyrighted website namely Google. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:19, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:26033 440713409688 841209688 5371832 1874802 n.jpg[edit]

File:26033 440713409688 841209688 5371832 1874802 n.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JJYeo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Technically un-sourced, but the uploader name suggests this might have been "work for hire" on their behalf. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:27, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:CS5L CMM Diagram.png[edit]

File:CS5L CMM Diagram.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sean p connors (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Please delete this orphaned and unencyclopedic file, previously used in an article that has been deleted and in other deleted page(s) created by the same user. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:40AngelEncapsu2.jpg[edit]

File:40AngelEncapsu2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Nikitchenko (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Upload by blocked user (suspected sock) so can't ask them to confirm the permission via OTRS. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:EstadioMirafloresempty.jpeg[edit]

File:EstadioMirafloresempty.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Azuran (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unsourced, was tagged as F4 previously, but another contributor apparently declines on the basis that the uploader took the photo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:PentaxOptios5i.jpg[edit]

File:PentaxOptios5i.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Redsully (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Querying if this can be a self-licensable image as it contains design elements of the camera, my initial feeling that there wasn't anything distinctive enough, but wanted a second opinion. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:427 sydorenko amnesia05.jpg[edit]

File:427 sydorenko amnesia05.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bereznitsky-gallery (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Work by living artist. Not sure how this can be Creative Commons, but willing to consider fair-use. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:25, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Westpeak04.jpg[edit]

File:Westpeak04.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mikebeckbeck (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Upload by blocked user, so can't confirm it's own work easily. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

July 31[edit]

Footer[edit]

Today is July 31 2016. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 July 31 -- (new nomination)

If the current date's page has been started without the header, apply {{subst:Ffd log}} to the top of the day's page.

Please ensure "===July 31===" is at the very top of the new page so that internal page links from the main Files for discussion page (the one you're on now) work.

The page Wikipedia:Files for discussion/Today will always show today's log.