Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 September 7

< September 6	September 8 >

September 7

File:Krzyzac3.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot is used in the article Knights of the Teutonic Order (film) against WP:FILMNFI in that the plot section describes the film and is not critical commentary of the image itself. The fair use rationale states "This image illustrates the text next to which it appears, which describes the character portrayed." but there is no text next to the screenshot describing the character portrayed. There is no critical commentary of the image itself in the article, it does nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the film, thereby failing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 04:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Samsung Pay Logo.svg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense as PD-ineligible-USonly. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Simple text logo John123521 (Talk-Contib.) 06:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, can you please explain your problem with the image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmanuelsayshai (talk • contribs) 00:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Text-only logo, could be moved to Commons--John123521 (Talk-Contib.) 03:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to "PD-ineligible-USonly" as it is clearly below the TOO. Commons doesn't cover South Korea in their TOO page so might be safer to leave it hosted on Wikipedia. Salavat (talk) 02:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hyperloop One Logo.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This logo is licensed locally under fair use, however there is a duplicate at Commons which is considered simple. The only complex element I can see is the gradient on the infinity symbol substituted for the oo pair in the loop syllable. I'm not convinced this is original enough for the logo to need it to be under "fair use" and locally hosted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:University of Greifswald logo.svg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This logo is currently locally hosted with a non-free use rationale, However the duplicate at Commons c:File:Uni Greifswald - Siegel.svg seemed to have a license indciating that the relevant logo was old enough to be out of copyright. If this is so then the local copy is replaceable with a free version. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Gordon Wright, Scottish Publisher, Writer and Photographer.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EXIF states copyright owner as subject. – Train2104 (t • c) 13:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Map of Gwadar.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 ⚡ 10:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

looks like a scan/screenshot, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 21:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Jade Ewen Performance at Eurovision.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free screen capture. The fact that she sang at the Eurovision Song Contest 2009 is adequately described in text so WP:NFCC#1 is not met. There is no significant sourced commentary about the image itself so WP:NFCC#8 is not met. Whpq (talk) 21:41, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Acceptance and Action Questionnaire.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8, omission would not be detrimental to the understanding of the topic. Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Adrian mitchell 1965. 2008.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3, minimal number of items is not being respected here. Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:12, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.