Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 9

< April 8	April 10 >

April 9[edit]

File:MVSU V State Wordmark.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: Soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned PD image. ☔️ Corkythehornetfan 🌺 05:52, 9 April 2016 (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:DrakeOneDance.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: Change license to PD-textlogo Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:16, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Querying why this needs an NFUR when all I'm seeing is simple typography. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? There's no strict guidelines for songs with artwork that should just randomly not have it on the page? This isn't some random alternate cover, it's his lead single with official cover art. BlaccCrab (talk) 09:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wait you're just trying to get rid of the non-free use on it, not delete it...lol. Nevermind BlaccCrab (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2016 (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:Lauren Wildbolz.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: Delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo/Screenshot of a professional press/promotional image. File was uploaded by a new user with few contributions; no reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder FASTILY 10:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: very professional looking advertising/PR/publicity style studio photo is most unlikely the original work of the uploader other than taking a photo from a magazine or other source. A professional would not take such an image on his iPhone 4S per the metadata. Without OTRS verification it should go. ww2censor (talk) 16:12, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I tagged it with {{keep local}}, because I expected a DR on commons. IOW, it could be suited as "fair use", it's a rather small image. But actually I'm looking for an image on dewiki, where "fair use" isn't allowed. Besides the person is now a cook, not a model. –Be..anyone (talk) 05:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A fair use claim would require a source, which we do not currently have. It would also require evidence that the person is dead, which we do not have either. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Living person, thanks for info. –Be..anyone 💩 13:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It looks a bit like a photo of a magazine. In other words, the uploader probably found a magazine containing this photograph and took a photograph of the magazine. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:45, 12 April 2016 (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:Kit body vneckwhite.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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This local copy of commons:File:Kit body vneckwhite.png is almost identical. Either the local copy should be deleted for being redundant to the Commons image, or the Commons image updated with the local copy. The upload history of the Commons image suggests that the local copy is outdated. Also, is the copyright license on Commons legit? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:41, 9 April 2016 (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:Kit body hun1213a.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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This file exists on Commons under the same name but it's not exactly identical. Assuming that the Commons file is correct - and correctly licensed - the local copy should be deleted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why should it be deleted? What's wrong with having two similar images? --Stefan2 (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what is wrong here is the shadowing. If they are only similar, they shouldn't occupy the same name.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:15, 16 April 2016 (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:BRIDESHEAD.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: Withdrawn for now. Even when the book jacket might be in PD in the UK, the English Wikipedia still abides to US copyright law. That is, fair use. But that's my opinion. Feel free to re-nominate in the latest date. (non-admin closure) George Ho (talk) 04:37, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the UK book cover itself free to use right now? I tried to find the identity of the dust jacket designer; no name has yet been found. The book itself is copyrightable. Actually, the question points to the book jacket. Seventy years passed. Does the copyright belong to Chapman & Hill or the jacket designer? Either way, as long as it is anonymous work for hire, I believe transferring to Commons would be okay. Right? George Ho (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2016 (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:Michael Thompson.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: Delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low size image that is shadowing a Commons file. Also, the upload log is giving two mutually contradictory license statements, one of which would put the copyright status into question. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:25, 9 April 2016 (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:Uturn.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2016 (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:Mameluke.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: Delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, low quality, wrong authorship and copyright information. Stefan2 (talk) 14:09, 9 April 2016 (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:Nesting.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, low resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:01, 9 April 2016 (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:Siblings.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:27, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2016 (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:Radha.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unidentified people. Stefan2 (talk) 15:29, 9 April 2016 (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:Mh-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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2016 (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:Kit body redbluesides.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2016 (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:Promoshot.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: delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overwritten file: two in one.

File uploaded by Tntelvis (talk · contribs): No evidence of permission.
File uploaded by BurtWorks (talk · contribs): No licensing information. Also unclear if the uploader is the copyright holder. The uploader's userpage links to the article about the stated photographer, but this might only be the case because the uploader wrote an article about the person and then moved the article to the article namespace. Stefan2 (talk) 15:47, 9 April 2016 (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:EverythingEverything.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: soft delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unidentified subject. Stefan2 (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2016 (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:WIMap-doton-Middle Village.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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 16:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There exists an almost identical file with the same name and topic on Commons, too. The difference is only one islet apparently; Wikimapia's base image does not indicate it though.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:23, 16 April 2016 (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:That's.svg[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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to c:File:That's.svg. No need for two vectorisations of the same logo. Stefan2 (talk) 16:09, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the commons version is shorter and valid. –Be..anyone 💩 10:09, 16 April 2016 (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:Kit body 3lightbluestripes.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 by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2016 (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:Suji.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, low quality, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2016 (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:Son of the Soil.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unidentified person. Stefan2 (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2016 (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:Nadal.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, blurry. Stefan2 (talk) 17:52, 9 April 2016 (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:Santalucia.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: delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be sourced to http://www.hillick.net/gallery/santa-lucia/morning_again_because_this_is_a_sweet_view^{[dead link]}. Stefan2 (talk) 17:53, 9 April 2016 (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:Janky.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 18:12, 9 April 2016 (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:Work 6.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: unidentified person. Credited to Shaun Wilson, but it doesn't say who Shaun Wilson is. Stefan2 (talk) 18:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be Shaun Wilson but we would need OTRS verification of the licensing, which we don't have. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2016 (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:Silba.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unusable due to watermarks. Stefan2 (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2016 (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:Times.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 by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2016 (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:LangtonLoop 2.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 by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2016 (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:Scorpion logo (Wierdox).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 by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Claimed to be a logo, and if this claim is correct, then the image might be unfree. Stefan2 (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2016 (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:WhatADay.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: Removed from articles except What a Day Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 in Jesus music and Phil Keaggy. Also fails WP:NFCC#9. Stefan2 (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2016 (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:Lungi Dance.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#9: not critically discussed. Stefan2 (talk) 20:32, 9 April 2016 (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:Jamboree25.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: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:12, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails MOS:FILM#Soundtrack and WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2016 (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:Regina-belle-baby-come-to-me-columbia.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: Relisted at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 June 1#File:Regina-belle-baby-come-to-me-columbia.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:32, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The current Columbia Records logo is now in Commons. The same may be said for the 1980s logo. However, the top half of the side label is orange; the bottom half, yellow. Nevertheless, all of the text is too factual and too simple to be copyrightable. Shall it be moved to Commons? George Ho (talk) 20:43, 9 April 2016 (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:Emin-My-Bed.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: no consensus to delete Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 in Young British Artists. In Special:PermanentLink/710034997, an IP stated that this is a fake. No idea if the IP's claim is correct. If this is a fake, then it fails WP:NFCC#8 on all pages. Stefan2 (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Given other images of the same installation online, this doesn't appear to be a fake. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed use from Young British Artists s I believe that use is excessive. But not as part of an official close here. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2016 (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.