Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 May 7

< May 6	May 8 >

May 7[edit]

File:Cages (comic book cover).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: remove from author article and retain in artwork article. The general consensus is that the copyrighted artwork does not have sufficient contextual significance to merit fair-use inclusion in its author's biography. Sorry NickNack009. Deryck C. 14:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decorative use in Dave McKean. Non-free cover art is generally considered acceptable when its used as the primary means of identification in a stand-alone article about the work in question, but a much stronger justification for non-free use is required with respect to other articles as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3. The particular book cover is not itself the subject of any sourced commentary and does not need to be seen by the reader to understand what is written about the book in the article, so the context required by WP:NFCC#8 is lacking. A link to the stand-alone article Cages (comics) seems more than sufficient per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI. Suggest keep for the stand-alone article about the comic book and remove from the article about the author. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained this to you elsewhere, and you have ignored it and repeated your spurious objection as if I hadn't said anything. WHAT IS NOTABLE ABOUT A VISUAL ARTIST IS HIS VISUAL ART. THEREFORE, AN EXAMPLE OF HIS VISUAL ART IN HIS ARTICLE IS INFORMATIVE, NOT "DECORATIVE". Stop this ridiculous pedantic campaign against useful content. --Nicknack009 (talk) 07:54, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ignore what you call an "explanation", but I also don't agree with it and also don't feel my concerns are spurious; so, I suggest you try assuming good faith and avoid WP:SHOUTING. I tagged the file with {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} and you questioned that; so, this is the next step in discussing the non-free use of the file. Just because you claim the file's non-free use complies with relevant policy does not make it so. As I stated above, the file is being used in the stand-alone article about the comic book itself which the Wikipedia community considers to be an acceptable form of non-free use as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3; however, per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI, I think a link to the book's article seems more than sufficient in this case. In addition, there is already a freely licensed book cover which gives an example of the visual artist's visual art, so a non-free example is not really needed per WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#1. You'd be better off explaining how this particular file's non-free use complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy and the concerns I have raised instead of trying to argue WP:IMAGENAZI. Moreover, removing the {{ffdc}} from the image's caption like you did here does not stop this discussion from taking place. The template contains a link to this discussion and was added per the instructions at WP:FFD "Give due notice". It will be removed by the adminstrator whose closes this discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The other cover image may claim to be freely licenced, but unless the uploader, one "Signor Caligaro", is actually Dave McKean, and there is no indication that he is, then the claim to ownership of the image and the right to freely licence it is fraudulent. I did the right thing when I uploaded an image I didn't own the rights to - I acknowledged it's copyrighted status, and argued that it is impossible to illustrate an article about a living artist without using copyrighted images. "Signor Caligaro" did not. He simply claimed ownership of somebody else's work - and you accept that at face value. Clearly, you do not have the WP:COMPETENCE to be policing non-free use images. --Nicknack009 (talk) 10:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I actually tagged the other file for OTRS verification, and that will give the uploader a chance to verify they are the copyright holder. The file will eventually be evaluated by a Commons' admin. However, you once again are trying to make this a discussion about me instead of explaining how the use of this particular file in this particular article satisfies all 10 non-free content criteria. Uploading a file and then adding a non-free use rationale only prevents the file from being deleted per WP:F6; a non-free use rationale does not automatically mean a particular non-free use meets all 10 non-free criteria. If you want to discuss my compentency, feel free to do so at WP:ANI or another suitable noticeboard, but FFD is for discussing file use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which of those ten criteria does it fail? It doesn't fail "context" because, as I've repeatedly explained, it's an example of the artist's work, and his work is the reason he has an article in the first place. This image has been in the article, fulfilling that function, with a satisfactory fair use rationale, since 2004. The only available alternative has no rationale provided and is of uncertain provenance. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The non-free use rationales appear to have been added in 2008, not 2004, but regardless of how long the image has been used the simple the fact that WP:NOBODYCOMPLAINED before is not really a valid justification for non-free use. That's the same as trying to argue WP:LONGTIME or WP:CONTENTAGE, and it could be just that nobody thought to look closely at the file's non-free use before. As I posted in my original post, the use of non-free cover art is generally considered acceptable in stand-alone articles about the work in question when the file is used as the primary means of identification, but the "same rationale does not usually apply when the work is described in other articles, such as articles about the author or musician; in such articles, the NFCC criteria typically require that the cover art itself be significantly discussed within the article." How does seeing this particular image significantly improve the reader's understanding of the few sentences written about Cages in the McKean article to such a degree that not seeing it would be detrimental to that understanding? That is context required by NFCC#8, and I don't think that's currently being provided; this is why, per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI, a link to the stand-alone article seems more than sufficient in this particular case. Now, if you want to add more sourced discussion about this particular cover to the McKean article to strengthen the justification for non-free use, then please do.

Finally, this is just a discussion and it is acceptable for use to disagree. Like any discussion, others are free to participate and comment accordingly, and the admin who eventually decides to close this will look at all of the comments, assess them, and then close the discussion according to WP:FFDAI. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really not understand that an article about a visual artist needs to show you what his work looks like? Whether this particular one, or another one, but an article on a visual artist with no examples of his work fails to be adequately informative about the very thing that makes him notable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This is (currently) the best image available: it complies with policy and it's reasonably representative of his style, so it fulfils its informative function. Policy exists to help build an encyclopedia, it is not an end in itself. If your interpretation of policy requires you to make an article less informative and less well-sourced, then either the policy is faulty or your interpretation of it is. In this case I'd go with the latter. You're being a jobsworth. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:59, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from author's article. I agree that a sample of his artwork would be appropriate for his article, but I don't think either of the covers currently in use are good samples. A page of his interior art would be a much better option, in conjunction with some sourced reviews of the style. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per nom, remove from the biography; retain in the comic book article. The latter usage complies with NFCC, especially NFCC#8. --George Ho (talk) 04:52, 22 May 2017 (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:Chud 05.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

web-quality image, possible copyvio. Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:44, 7 May 2017 (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:Ryan Basisst.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

web-quality image, possible copyvio. Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:44, 7 May 2017 (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:Exterior Sketch Negative.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unneeded negative of File:Gray Exterior Sketch.jpg Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:48, 7 May 2017 (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:Ryan Johnson 2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

web-quality image, possible copyvio Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:50, 7 May 2017 (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:Ryan Pollard May, 2007.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal photo - WP:NOTWEBHOST Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:54, 7 May 2017 (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:JWMillerPic.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 as non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:10, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

historic photo, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 05:04, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photo of my grandfather that has been in the possession of the family for approximately 80 yrs. I scanned and uploaded it for this article. I don't know the source and there is no body alive to ask.This is my first article so I'm learning a lot, and trying to follow the rulesMolason (talk) 05:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information on this image. The image was taken at the Vega corporation (a division of Lockheed, probably by Lockheed photographers) in the early 1940's in Burbank, California. It appears that Wikipedia has a copyright for Lockheed Vega content under CC BY-SA 3.0. Molason (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: @Molason, was the photograph ever published? (Also Lockheed Vega would own the content, assuming that it was copyrighted. Depends on whether/how it was published. You might want to ask the company. Their content would not automatically be licensed under cc-by-sa.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 03:05, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If possibly public domain, move to Commons. I could not find copyright records of this photo at Archive.org. Without renewal registration, required previously by Copyright Act of 1909 (part of copyright law), the copyright would have expired 28 years after the photo's first publication. However, in case of doubt, relicense as non-free by default. The Vega Corporation is a defunct subsidiary of Lockheed, and I think Lockheed doesn't have commercial interests in this photo as it is an aviation company and part of Lockheed Martin currently. --George Ho (talk) 07:29, 22 May 2017 (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:RUeyegouge.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: relisted on 2017 June 20. Deryck C. 14:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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:Kansas Jayhawks logo.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: relisted on 2017 June 29. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kansas Jayhawks logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Passenger Lisr RMS Etruria.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: keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FFD referal, as the original uploader retired. This image is PD in the US given the dates the ship was in service. However, the ship was nominally British, and thusly an image of it might have been from the UK. Other than the note it came from Ebay, there's no other source listed, and the back of the card hasn't been uploaded.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:13, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PD in the US suffices for enwp. Thincat (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please add date/publication information to the file's description
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 03:16, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Thincat; its UK copyright status doesn't matter, since we don't require PD-in-home-country at en:wp. Nyttend (talk) 00:18, 9 May 2017 (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:Seedsbox.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 ⚡ 03:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

no clear encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2017 (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:Seedsboxset.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 ⚡ 03:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

no clear encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:53, 7 May 2017 (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:Rymzo Churchill DeGusto.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

no encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:54, 7 May 2017 (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:Rynoh album cover -finished-.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

probable copyvio of album cover from non-notable band Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:56, 7 May 2017 (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:Ryterfelt's dog Maxy.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

too poor in quality to be of encyclopedic use Jon Kolbert (talk) 04:00, 7 May 2017 (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:Ryu vs the Jaquio - Three Parts.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

probable copyvio - screenshot of copyrighted game Jon Kolbert (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2017 (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:Rylandbouchard.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

promotional image of notable individual, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 06:17, 7 May 2017 (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:S4023611.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal photo - WP:NOTWEBHOST Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:46, 7 May 2017 (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:SAarmy.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

dubious self-work claim Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:53, 7 May 2017 (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:Gravity Petra.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfree per commons:COM:TOYS Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2017 (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:Fury(NA)2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfree per commons:COM:TOYS Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2017 (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:CPC mode.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfree per commons:COM:TOYS Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:55, 7 May 2017 (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:Gravity Petra 2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfree per commons:COM:TOYS Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:55, 7 May 2017 (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:Saber Lion 2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfree per commons:COM:TOYS Jon Kolbert (talk) 06:55, 7 May 2017 (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:Westie.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

too blurry to be of encyclopedic use Jon Kolbert (talk) 09:34, 7 May 2017 (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:Sachinfull.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio, regardless, no indication of which player this is Jon Kolbert (talk) 09:37, 7 May 2017 (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:Sacramentlive1.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal photo - WP:NOTWEBHOST Jon Kolbert (talk) 09:40, 7 May 2017 (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:Madonna Rebel Heart physical standard cover.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: relisted on 2017 June 20. Deryck C. 14:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Madonna Rebel Heart physical standard cover.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Timi Alaibe.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Low-resolution, uploader has history of copyvio uploads – Train2104 (t • c) 17:18, 7 May 2017 (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:Bronzeville cast.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scan of copyrighted flyer – Train2104 (t • c) 17:22, 7 May 2017 (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:Bronzeville Flyer.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: Convert non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:06, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scan of copyrighted flyer – Train2104 (t • c) 17:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-license as non-free poster and move to the top of the article as the lead image. The other two, File:Bronzeville cast.jpg and File:Bronzeville Postcard.jpg could probably go as they appear to be non-free also. Salavat (talk) 12:05, 8 May 2017 (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:Bronzeville Postcard.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scan of copyrighted flyer – Train2104 (t • c) 17:22, 7 May 2017 (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:Bronzeville EWP reading.pdf[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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scan of copyrighted flyer – Train2104 (t • c) 17:22, 7 May 2017 (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:SailorGeneric.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possibly not free due to being a derivative of copyrighted works Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:19, 7 May 2017 (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:Saint George Angels and his Carabao.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

too blurry to be of encyclopedic use Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:22, 7 May 2017 (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:Skybroadband.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused wordmark. Cloudbound (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2017 (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:French Connection.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. I was the original uploader, Beao added transparency. Cloudbound (talk) 20:24, 7 May 2017 (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:Malldis.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

colouring makes image unsuitable for encyclopedic use Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:11, 7 May 2017 (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:Sajay Singh.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

subject does not seem to be notable, no encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:12, 7 May 2017 (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:Salavat green.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio - not self-work Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:21, 7 May 2017 (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:Saleem ali.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

too small to be of any encyclopedic use Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - as the uploader I concur that you can delete it User: saleemhali

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:Salgaocar homekit.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio - seems to be taken froma newspaper, according to uploader comments Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2017 (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:Mohsc vs ebsc.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio - seems to be taken froma newspaper, according to uploader comments Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2017 (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:Salar & Asad Owaisi.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal image no encyclopedic use FASTILY 21:47, 7 May 2017 (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:Salt of the earth 00000120.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

non-free, film was published in 1954 Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:17, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well there isn't much to say.... it is fair use of an image that is on the 'Net... thanks.. A E Francis

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:Salt.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not that this image previously nominated at FFD. There is no evidence of permission for this photograph - the argument at the last FFD was that the usernames bore resemblance to the PR staff at the company, but that alone isn't enough to confirm the validity of the copyright status. Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:20, 7 May 2017 (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.