Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 January 10

January 10[edit]

File:McCollumHallFSU.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 ⚡ 08:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claim of own work as the image could be found on another website (click the second thumbnail on the third row if you get a broken image) prior to the upload to Wikipedia. Ixfd64 (talk) 02:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2024 (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:Duchamp LargeGlass.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: Relicense as PD. Whpq (talk) 13:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duchamp LargeGlass.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

US copyright for this work clearly expired, but French copyright will end in 2038. Also, please restore deleted version of this file. Michalg95 (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the discussion topic here? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My best guess is "Non-free file may actually be free", specifically {{PD-US-expired-abroad|out_of_copyright_in=2039}}.Wikiacc (¶) 22:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Retain as-is, with non-free tag~~, unless further evidence is uncovered. It is not clear the US copyright has expired. When and where was the work first published (as defined by US copyright law)? Does the 1926 Brooklyn Museum exhibition count as "publication" for the purposes of US copyright law? Wikiacc (¶) 22:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Relicense as PD, don't move to Commons, here is a photo of the work in a book published in 1928 in Paris. Wikiacc (¶) 17:43, 15 January 2024 (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:New tube for london final design.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: No consensus -Fastily 02:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was originally uploaded in 2022, when only a concept art existed and no real trains have been built yet. As of 2023, the real trains have been built and testing has started in Germany (see https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-66371673), meaning that someone from or in Germany (or even better a worker from Siemens which built the trains) can take a photo of the trains and release it under a free license already. I originally removed it from the article New Tube for London on this reasoning, however @Turini2: disagreed saying that "I don't think that applies - it's not been publicly seen outside a test track deep in Austria. There is still no free alternative at this time. We can wait until it arrives!" I therefore am putting this FFD forward. S5A-0043^Talk 11:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely doubt that someone at Siemens would be allowed to take a photo on the job and release the photo with a free licence! The testing is not occurring in a public space. Siemens or TfL have not released photos of the finished train with a free licence.

There is no possibility for a layperson to take a photo of the train at this time - therefore there is no free equivalent. It is currently planned that the trains will be delivered to London in 2024, when I suspect a free licence photo would rapidly appear. I suspect we can wait until that time. Turini2 (talk) 14:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is mainly about "could be created", there's no doubt that a free equivalent does not exist currently. The Evening Standard for example was invited to see the new trains, and the reporter actually took a Twitter video of the train [1]. This does show that one can be created, though it's still a matter of time as to when. S5A-0043^Talk 04:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its probably best to wait until these trains make it into service or are brought into public testing within the UK, because by then there wouldn't be any doubt that someone could photograph the real thing under a free licence (and potentially upload it to wikimedia) which would no longer warrant the reason for the non-free photo to exist within Wikipedia. You would have the average train enthusiast and layman taking hundreds of photos to share online, should they arrive in the UK. -NHPluto (talk) 07:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until such time as the trains are in a publicly accessible location. Per WP:NFC, we would not accept a free photograph of a structure on inaccessible private property that is not visible from public locations. Unless the testing facility is publicly accessible or visible, then we really are not a point where our non-free content policy would consider this replaceable. -- Whpq (talk) 23:07, 17 January 2024 (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:Dr. Dre - Nuthin' But a "G" Thang.ogg[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 ⚡ 16:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Used in Dr. Dre, Nuthin' but a 'G' Thang, and The Chronic. Inadequately covered by critical commentary. Nothing in the sample indicates full understanding of those topic in question; may fail WP:NFCC#8. George Ho (talk) 12:04, 10 January 2024 (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:Dr. Dre - Fuck Wit Dre Day.ogg[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 2024 January 17. ✗plicit 14:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dr. Dre - Fuck Wit Dre Day.ogg (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:Dr. Dre - Let Me Ride.ogg[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 ⚡ 16:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage in Let Me Ride and The Chronic may neither prove contextual significance to the topics nor comply with WP:NFCC#8. George Ho (talk) 12:09, 10 January 2024 (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:Latalante.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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now PD and available on Commons: c:File:L'Atalante (1934), poster.jpg. Yann (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2024 (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:Bishop Kallarangatt Coat of Arms.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, the coat of arms of a Catholic bishop is easily replicable using free assets. This is standard practice across thousands of articles, so this fails Criteria 1 of WP:NFCCP, specifically "no free equivalent is available, or could be created..." ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a source of a free equivalent because right now it goes under the "Coat Of Arms" option in the non free ones Phillypaboy123 (talk) 00:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If someone creates a coat of arms based on its written description, then they could license it any way they wish. See c:Commons:Coats of arms. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2024 (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:JohnNBartos.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have been cropped from a Facebook photo and flipped horizontally. Source website does not indicate a free license. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 04:03, 14 January 2024 (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.