Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 21

< June 20	June 22 >

June 21[edit]

File:Sandmankieth.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: relisted on 2017 June 29. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sandmankieth.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

Off the Wall (Michael Jackson song)[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 on 2017 July 2. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:37, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Off the Wall by Michael Jackson A-side US vinyl single.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

File:Michaeljoffthewall.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Tristan Prettyman 9.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: Tag as "no evidence of permission". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Person in the picture claims to be the copyright holder. Dubious copyright claim, as a photographer is the copyright holder, not the person appearing in the picture. One image by this editor was already deleted because the EXIF metadata named Getty Images as the copyright holder. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of transfer of ownership for the image that was deleted has been emailed to wikipedia permissions email. Other images were all always photographed and owned as claimed and details have been sent in email too to wikipedia. --Gloudn (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from OTRS agent: information claiming ownership of this image was sent by a user to OTRS as ticket 2017060110005334, however, there was not sufficient information about the identity of the copyright holder to accept the free license that was declared by the user. So, the free license that is claimed on this file page has not been successfully verified by OTRS. seb26 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 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:Tristan Prettyman 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: Tag as "no evidence of permission". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:45, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Person in the picture claims to be the copyright holder. Dubious copyright claim, as a photographer is the copyright holder, not the person appearing in the picture. One image by this editor was already deleted because the EXIF metadata named Getty Images as the copyright holder. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of transfer of ownership for the image that was deleted has been emailed to wikipedia permissions email. Other images were all always photographed and owned as claimed and details have been sent in email too to wikipedia. --Gloudn (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from OTRS agent: information claiming ownership of this image was sent by a user to OTRS as ticket 2017060110005334, however, there was not sufficient information about the identity of the copyright holder to accept the free license that was declared by the user. So, the free license that is claimed on this file page has not been successfully verified by OTRS. seb26 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 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:Tristan Prettyman 5.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: Tag as "no evidence of permission". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:44, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Person in the picture claims to be the copyright holder. Dubious copyright claim, as a photographer is the copyright holder, not the person appearing in the picture. One image by this editor was already deleted because the EXIF metadata named Getty Images as the copyright holder. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of transfer of ownership for the image that was deleted has been emailed to wikipedia permissions email. Other images were all always photographed and owned as claimed and details have been sent in email too to wikipedia. --Gloudn (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from OTRS agent: information claiming ownership of this image was sent by a user to OTRS as ticket 2017060110005334, however, there was not sufficient information about the identity of the copyright holder to accept the free license that was declared by the user. So, the free license that is claimed on this file page has not been successfully verified by OTRS. seb26 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 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:Tristan Prettyman infobox image.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: keep. If OTRS permission verified Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:45, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Person in the picture claims to be the copyright holder. Dubious copyright claim, as a photographer is the copyright holder, not the person appearing in the picture. One image by this editor was already deleted because the EXIF metadata named Getty Images as the copyright holder. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 11:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of transfer of ownership for the image that was deleted has been emailed to wikipedia permissions email. Other images were all always photographed and owned as claimed and details have been sent in email too to wikipedia. --Gloudn (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from OTRS agent: information claiming ownership of this image was sent by a user to OTRS as ticket 2017060110005334, however, because the ownership was allegedly transferred to the user from the original author under a signed purchase agreement, the ticket is still awaiting a confirmation statement of that arrangement from the original author. It may be appropriate to grant more time for this permission since this statement was only asked of the author in recent days. However, if it is decided that this file be deleted sooner, it can easily be un-deleted once aforementioned confirmation arrives. seb26 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. OTRS agent: finally a message from the specific copyright holder of this photo arrived and successfully releases specifically this photograph under a free license. It is available for view in the above ticket (message dated 26/06/2017 05:53). Keep this file so its permission can be added and it can be transferred to Commons. Note that this comment of mine does not change my earlier comments on 3 other images of Tristan Prettyman located above on this deletion page. seb26 (talk) 13:47, 26 June 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.