Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 October 19

October 19[edit]

File:Hanging of Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 11:36, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFC#UUI, Criterion 7: A photo from a press agency or photo agency (e.g., AP or Getty Images), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article. MirrorPlanet 🪞🪐 05:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Happiestdayminigame2023.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 15:38, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free article with no critical commentary in either article it is meant to be used in. Even if the image wasn't decorative use as the moment, the image rationale is still relatively poor and the image source links to the wrong page. Fails guidelines. NegativeMP1 08:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hoover history.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 15:38, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Purchasing aphysical photograph on ebay does not transmit copyright in the image. Unfortunately, there is absolutely no further information regarding provenance, dating etc. so even though these images are likely to be public domain in the United States one way or other, I have not been able to make that sure. The most likely would be that they were published before 1964 and then their copyright not renewed, but I doubt that likelihood suffices to relicense it. Felix QW (talk) 11:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hoover people.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 15:38, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Purchasing aphysical photograph on ebay does not transmit copyright in the image. Unfortunately, there is absolutely no further information given regarding its provenance. It seems from some digging that the 5000000th Hoover celebrations took place in 1939, so if these images had been published around then and not renewed, they would now be in the public domain. However, I am unsure that this likelihood suffices for relicensing it PD. Felix QW (talk) 11:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hockessin-Public-Valuation.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 01:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware, the state of Delaware does not automatically place government works in the public domain. Therefore, the argument for these images to be in the public domain comes down to whether they were published in 1941. To me, neither submission to court nor to an insurance provider clearly seems to be "general publication" by the standards set out in C Lindberg's detailed explanation on Commons. Therefore copyright could last until 120 years after creation in 1941. Felix QW (talk) 12:08, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: like a lot of pre 2006 images, this one seems to have been lost to time anyway. — MATRIX! (a good person!)^{[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much!]} 20:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Saifee Burhani Upliftment Project Depiction.webp[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 2023 October 26. ✗plicit 14:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saifee Burhani Upliftment Project Depiction.webp (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Statue of the Mother (Matatirtha, Nepal).jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 01:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no freedom of panorama in Nepal. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 15:35, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Wet Dream 2023 album cover.png[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 01:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not discussed critically, not used for educational purposes, no commentary on the file. Fails WP:NFCC. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:59, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.