Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 June 4

< June 3	June 5 >

June 4[edit]

File:Samovar boiler.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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not being used on any article here. Perhaps it is best used in Wikimedia, since the object is the uploader's own as mentioned in the FUR. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:19, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As it is, the image is watermarked all over with the uploader's name. This is not suitable for use in articles or in Commons. -- Whpq (talk) 17:27, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:50, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK --DBig Xray 15:00, 10 June 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:WHEEL HUB-Royal Enfield Motorcycle 1961.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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not being used on any article here. Perhaps it is best used in Wikimedia, since the object is the uploader's own as mentioned in the FUR. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:WATERMARK too destructive. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK had to look closely though. No usage expcted either. --DBig Xray 15:02, 10 June 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:Royal Enfield Motorcycle 1961.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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not being used on any article here. Perhaps it is best used in Wikimedia, since the object is the uploader's own as mentioned in the FUR. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. The use of watermarks ruin the usefulness of the image. Salavat (talk) 00:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - destructive WP:WATERMARK — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK had to look closely though.--DBig Xray 15:06, 10 June 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:OIL CAP -Royal Enfield Motorcycle 1961.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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not being used on any article here. Perhaps it is best used in Wikimedia, since the object is the uploader's own as mentioned in the FUR. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. The use of watermarks ruin the usefulness of the image. Salavat (talk) 00:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Destructive WP:WATERMARK — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK. No usage expcted either.--DBig Xray 15:05, 10 June 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:Charles Millican portrait.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 on 2018 June 12. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Charles Millican portrait.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:Harold Hume portrait c 1940.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 on 2018 June 12. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Harold Hume portrait c 1940.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:Glenn Dumke.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 on 2018 June 12. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glenn Dumke.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:P&H overhead bridge crane circa 1888.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 00:02, 6 June 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:Rishi Samadhiya 2.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. It may have some value being hosted on Commons, since it is the uploader's own. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK watermark appears to be promotional as well. --DBig Xray 15:20, 10 June 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:Rishi Samadhiya 1.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. It may have some value being hosted on Commons, since it is the uploader's own. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK watermark appears to be promotional as well. --DBig Xray 15:19, 10 June 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:Rishi Samadhiya 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: Delete; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. It may have some value being hosted on Commons, since it is the uploader's own. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:02, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK watermark appears to be promotional as well. --DBig Xray 15:18, 10 June 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:Rishi Samadhiya.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. It may have some value being hosted on Commons, since it is the uploader's own. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:02, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK watermark appears to be promotional as well. --DBig Xray 15:17, 10 June 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:HIGHFIELD, NSW, Australia.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: Relicense as PD-1923. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

License needs to be clarified: the uploader has selected a CC-BY-SA license, but the summary text says the Shire Council allows only non-commercial use. John of Reading (talk) 08:16, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and change tag. According to this page, it is a postcard from between 1900-1910, and so would be in the public domain in both AU and US. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:02, 9 June 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:Tomb of Pope Adrian V.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. The use of watermarks ruin the usefulness of the image. Salavat (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - destructive WP:WATERMARK — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK --DBig Xray 15:08, 10 June 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:Tomb of Pope Clement IV.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. The use of watermarks ruin the usefulness of the image. Salavat (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - destructive WP:WATERMARK — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:03, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WATERMARK --DBig Xray 15:09, 10 June 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:50 years of Cyta.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These orphaned files were taken from [1] and the uploader claimed they were released by the website owner (Cyta) as public domain. However, I don't see any such statement on the source website.

It looks like the current copyright term for photographs in Cyprus is 70 years after the author's death, though it might have been different when these photos were taken.

Without clear and verifiable source information, we can't assume these are public domain images in either the US or Cyprus, so they should be deleted. clpo13_(talk) 18:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Site says copyrighted. [2] No clear permission either.--DBig Xray 15:15, 10 June 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.