Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 March 18

< March 17	March 19 >

March 18[edit]

File:Danggan Balun - QC2017-007 Claim Area.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 ⚡ 11:43, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Map apparently created by Queensland South Native Title Services in 2017. According to c:COM:Australia, government works in Australia are subject to crown copyright for 50 years after publication. Wikiacc (¶) 01:34, 18 March 2021 (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:Honor Our Female Veterans Proclamation.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 ⚡ 11:43, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Works by the City of Raleigh, North Carolina are probably copyrighted unless otherwise indicated. See [1]. Wikiacc (¶) 02:48, 18 March 2021 (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:John Dring c1935.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 to non-free -FASTILY 22:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This photo was taken around 1935, author unknown, and (seemingly) first published in The Daily Telegraph (UK) in 1991. If the photo had not been made available to the public before 1991, the photo is copyrighted in the US until ~~2087~~ 2048 and UK until 2062. The uploader seems to claim that the subject's daughter released the work into the public domain, but it's unlikely she had the authority to do so (since the photographer might still hold copyright). As the subject is deceased and photos of him are hard to find, I suggest relicense to non-free. Wikiacc (¶) 02:59, 18 March 2021 (UTC), edited 03:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes his daughter said to me (not in writing unfortunately) that she was happy for it to be released into the public domain. She noted that it had already been published in his obituary. The photo was taken by a professional photographer but I'm unclear how the laws about copyright worked in 1935. I have no opinion on relicensing to free, but if the experts feel that's the right thing, then by all means go for it.Cathyday (talk) 05:03, 18 March 2021 (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.