Keep deleted. The article Donald Trump baby balloon already has a fair use image of the same balloon being flown at the same event, apparently extracted from this deleted image. I don't think that adding a second, substantially identical fair use image would meet WP:NFCC. Sandstein 14:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Based on Sandstein's comments endorse. If there is something else to be discussed (been released into the public domain or CC/SA), great. Otherwise I don't think our fair use rules allow us to keep it. Hobit (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep deleted It's not desirable to have many non free images in an article. The one there I think suffices per the size of the article. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Closing administrator comment. There was no attempt to discuss the matter with me, nor did I receive a notification of this discussion. Regardless, I'm not seeing any compelling reason to restore this file. ℯxplicit 00:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep deleted per Sandstein. I thought I'd disagree upon reading their statement, but this situation is clearly and specifically covered at WP:NFCC. SportingFlyertalk 21:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
Zorin OS – Unprotected to allow recreation, which in turn can be submitted to AfD. Sandstein 10:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
(see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zorin OS (2nd nomination) as well, also sorry if I double pinged) Now that the distro has been around for a while, there is much more than just distrowatch -- I have added several reviews, etc, to source the article. I started doing this to add it to List of Linux distributions after someone added it and it got reverted. If you look at this list, the length of this article is not unusual, the version history table is well sourced with release notes (coupled with more recent articles talking about it), etc. In my opinion, this article with the citations as is would fit notability requirements, even just with the 7 or so citations of third party articles (ignoring the official Zorin releases). It'd be helpful if we could see the article as it was when it was deleted to see exactly what citations they were talking about when it was deleted. Another thing to keep in mind is that Zorin OS was deleted back in '09 when it was in beta, and it's still around nearly 10 years later and of course has had time to gain notability. HarryKernow.Talk. 20:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotect this was last sent to AfD five years ago and that version was a lot worse than the linked draft. The bar to reopening the issue should be low. Hut 8.5 21:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this belongs here or not, but sure, it should be unsalted given the draft looks reasonable at first glance and it was approved at AfC. Hobit (talk) 03:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unsalt. This may or may not survive another AfD, but the draft looks reasonable, and has significantly better sourcing than the version that was deleted five years ago. That's all that should be required to accept the draft and move it to mainspace. If somebody objects, bring it back to AfD for another round of scrutiny. -- RoySmith(talk) 02:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
