Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 February 14

< February 13	February 15 >

February 14

File:New GBK Main Stadium from Drone Jan 2018.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 ⚡ 02:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image of the newly renovated Gelora Bung Karno Stadium which has two copyright issues which need to be resolved: the copyright status of the staidium, and the copyright status of the photo.

The first issue has to do with whether there is any copyright on the actual design of the stadium. In some countries such as the c:COM:FOP#United States, there is no copyright protection for building such as this which means they can be freely photographed. However, this might not be the case for Indonesia where this staidium is located per c:COM:FOP#Indonesia. I've asked about this at c:COM:VP/C#FoP in Indonesia, but haven't gotten definite response. If stadiums such as this (especially ones owned/operated by the Indonesian Government) are not eligible for copyright protect under Indonesian law, then all that matters if the copyright status of the photo. If, however, it is deemed to be eligible for copyright protection, then probably needs to be treated as non-free or perhaps as {{FoP-USonly}}. The file was uploaded as {{non-free architectural work}} which no longer is applicable since the construction has been completed. The "non-free architectural work" template suggests using "FoP-USonly" in that case of countries there is no FoP for buildings. If that's the case, then this probably can be treated as PD locally for Wikipedia, but whether the file can be kept depends upon the copyright status of the photo.

So, the copyright status of the photo needs to be sorted out. The file is sourced to Instagram and Instagram's licensing terms is not usually compatible with WP:COPY or c:COM:L. I cannot find anything on the photo or the account holders page which says that this particular photo has been released under a free license as the non-free use rationale is claiming. So, OTRS verification is probably needed for the photo since it is clearly a WP:DERIVATIVE. If it cannot be OTRS verified, then it needs to be deleted regardless of the copyright status of the stadium. If the stadium is "FoP-USonly", then OTRS verification is still needed per WP:NFCC#1 because someone else could take a photo of the same stadium for identification purposes and then release it under a free license. There are also various freely licensed photos of the stadium being used thoughout the article. The copyright licensing of these could possibly be wrong, but as long as they are not deleted from Commons, NFCC#1 says that any of them could be used in lieu of a non-free image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well first of all, the picture was taken by a drone, and to fly drones in such area (government-owned) is quite difficult here, if you do not have any credentials or permission to do so (the photographer did have as he was the field worker at the renovation). While there is no other picture taken from above, I think it is necessary to give this a shot until someone upload such picture under free-license -- Flix11 (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, particularly WP:NFCC#1, does not allow non-free files to be used "until a free equivalent is created"; it only allows them to be used when it is deemed that there is no reasonable expectation that any free equivalent can be found or created. Moreover, a free equivalent for primary identification purposes does not necessarily mean that another picture taken by a drone from high above the stadium needs to be found; it can be another picture of the stadium, including possibly one of those already being used in the article, taken from a different location or taken of a different part of the stadium.

Moreover, there's no indicatation anywhere on the Instragram account cited as a source for this file that the photographer/drone operator has released it under a free license. A photo uploaded to Instagram is not automatically assumed to have been released under a free license, just because it's publically visible or can be downloaded "free of charge"; on the contrary, it's assumed to be under copyright protection unless clearly indicated otherwise. In other words, a lack of copyright notice in cases like this does not necessarily mean not protected by copyright. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And indeed, it looks like someone has taken a few photos themselves (see here). Since this image has been orphaned in the last week anyways, I would say that the safest thing to do would be to delete it. ALH (talk) 20:42, 21 February 2018 (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.

Non-free host city logos in 2018 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship

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. ℯ xplicit 00:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clear decorative use of various non-free logos in 2018 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship#Host selection. Non-free use of images in an image gallery markup is almost never allowed per WP:NFG because the images typically lack the context required by WP:NFCC#8 and also do not meet WP:NFCC#3a. File:Italy-Bulgaria 2018 WCH.png is being used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox, so these individual host cities are not need for that despite the mistaken claim being made in each file's non-free use rationale. If there were individual artilcles written about each of these host cities, then perhaps the non-free use of the files in those articles would make sense. There's nothing, however, in the main tournament article about these hosts cities or more importantly about these individual logos which requires that they need to be see by the reader. Text is more that sufficient in this case per WP:FREER for identifying the individual host cities. Suggest delete for all files. Marchjuly (talk) 04:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The uploader has been notified of this discussion per common practice, but the account is currently under an indefinite block. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2018 (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.

Non-free Irish Sea Scout Flags

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/2018 May 25#Non-free Irish Sea Scout Flags. Steel1943 (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2018 (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:TF Studio Final.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 ⚡ 02:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient permission: the title of the image suggests that it was taken in or for the studio of Tim Flach, but the uploader claims to own the copyright. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:58, 14 February 2018 (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.