Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 March 15

< March 14	March 16 >

March 15[edit]

File:ICC Test Championship mace.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. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8, as this image does not significantly increase the reader's understanding of the tournament itself (as the article is about the tournament, not the trophy). Also, likely to fail WP:NFCC#1, as if/when the mace is in a country with freedom of panorama, it could be photographed and that image would be a free alternative to this copyrighted image. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:07, 16 March 2023 (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:StokholmZCzazen.svg[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. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Autotraced SVG of a photograph. Unused, no need. Jonteemil (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 02:01, 16 March 2023 (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:Norbelis Lameda.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. Can be restored if evidence of permission is sent to VRT. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook metadata in EXIF. Low-res. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 12:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 02:03, 16 March 2023 (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:ICC Men's T20 World Cup Trophy.webp[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. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8, as this image does not significantly increase the reader's understanding of the tournament itself (as the article is about the tournament, not the trophy). Also, likely to fail WP:NFCC#1, as if/when the trophy is in a country with freedom of panorama, it could be photographed and that image would be a free alternative to this copyrighted image. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2023 (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:James Brooker.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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1924 University of Michigan yearbook became public domain in 2020. Original version should be copied to Commons Abzeronow (talk) 19:28, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to PD-US-expired and copy to Commons. Salavat (talk) 02:08, 16 March 2023 (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:KATV ABC 7 Little Rock.svg[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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This logo appears to be under the threshold of originality in the United States, so I don't see why this needs to be held under a claim of fair use. Multiple similar images are on Commons, but none appear to be identical. As such, this should probably be moved to Commons as public domain. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to pd-logo and copy to Commons. Salavat (talk) 02:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relicense to pd-textlogo, copy to Commons. Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 21:34, 16 March 2023 (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:KATV Little Rock 2023.svg[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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This file appears to be almost the exact same as a number of ABC 7 logos, with the only difference being the color of the letters in "abc" and the color of the "7". Several related files are on Commons as being in the public domain, and I don't see why this file needs to be treated as if it were above the U.S. threshold of originality. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:11, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that since it was a logo of a television station, it would be copyrighted. Feel free to do whatever you need to do here. Thank you. Brainyshark03 23:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Circle 7 is in the public domain in the United States, as is the simple ABC Logo. The only potentially copyrightable elements in the KATV logo are the arrangement of the two PD logos ("mere variations in coloring" are not copyrightable in the United States), and that arrangement is far too simple to be above the threshold of originality in the United States (it's simply placing one logo partly on top of the other). There is nothing special about logos in terms of their copyright status; they have to meet the same originality threshold that other two-dimensional works do in order to be copyrightable works in the USA. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:59, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relicense to pd-logo and copy to Commons. Salavat (talk) 02:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relicense as pd-textlogo, copy to Commons. Justarandomamerican (talk) Have a good day! 21:16, 16 March 2023 (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.