Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 June 17

< June 16	June 18 >

June 17[edit]

File:Map of Voie Ferree Midelt.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:42, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plausibly non-free. Discussion is occurring here: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Map of Voie Ferree Midelt.jpg. Local version should be deleted either way. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:18, 17 June 2019 (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:Artifariti2010 PaulaAlvarez.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. ST47 (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plausibly non-free. Discussion is occurring here: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Artifariti2010 PaulaAlvarez.jpg. Local version should be deleted either way. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:24, 17 June 2019 (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:Yashdas.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

False licensing. This image is all over the internet. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. The user appears to have uploaded multiple files with licensing issues: User talk:Abu Bakkar Siddiki (Shobuz).-Ich (talk) 09:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - the uploader does not have a good grasp of copyright. This was copied from the subject's Facebook page. The uploader even states they made it from Facebook. -- Whpq (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2019 (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:Shiv Kumar.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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Implausibly self-created. This image is found elsewhere online with a higher resolution. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:57, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the claim of own work is not plausible given stuff like this image which is larger and predates the v upload by years. -- Whpq (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2019 (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:Léon-Vasseur.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:42, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Available under a superior scan on Commons under the same name: c:File:Léon-Vasseur.jpg. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to your replacing the image in the relevant article with the one you prefer, as long as there is one of him in the article. Tim riley talk 08:00, 17 June 2019 (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:Curtis Gannon.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a non-standard public domain license and this doesn't quite match up with https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-CSPAN and https://www.c-span.org/about/copyrightsAndLicensing/ . (C-SPAN is a little tricky.) I don't think this actually qualifies as public domain. Ich (talk) 09:06, 17 June 2019 (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:Stella Creasy, Walthamstow.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image is claimed to be under OGL but there is no evidence. The image comes from a local borough council web site which is copyrighted. The permission link is not to a permission page from the local council. My understanding is that local councils can choose to use the OGL but are not obligated to do so. I see no OGL licensing statement from this council. Whpq (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, before uploading I checked to see if the image source was credited on news outlets that used it (such as PoliticsHome and the Guardian Series), and in none of those sources was Waltham Forest Council attributed. Thus, I believed that to be reasonable grounds that the image is free-for-use. I apologise if I was wrong to credit it as OGL, but I'm pretty sure it is free-for-use. Is there anything I can do to support that?--Executiveop (talk) 15:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All material is copyrighted by default. That the image was used on other sites without a credit does not make it a free file. Nor is there any sort of evidence to support it being OGL licensed. The only way to keep this file is for it to be freely licensed which is simply not the case here. -- Whpq (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Whpq: Ah, ok, I understand. Thanks! --Executiveop (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2019 (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.