Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 December 11

< December 10	December 12 >

December 11[edit]

File:Rock Lake bathymetric map.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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Map by the State of Wisconsin, incorrectly tagged as federal government works. Since the map was made in 1955, and doesn't appear to carry a copyright notice, maybe {{PD-US-no notice}} could apply? Wikiacc (¶) 03:36, 11 December 2020 (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:The dawn patrol.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: Converted to fair use by Wikiacc -FASTILY 06:56, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot of a 1930 US-made film, whose attribution to the US government seems confused (the US Library of Congress may hold a print but it certainly didn't make the film). Perhaps there is a valid reason for public domain (no copyright notice, copyright not renewed, etc.) but until we have evidence for that, I suggest delete or relicense as non-free. Wikiacc (¶) 04:04, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I can find is Movie stills and publicity photos which has 9 photographic prints of Let Us Be Gay, MGM, 1930; The Talker, First National Pictures 1923; McFadden's Flats, First National Pictures, 1927; The Four Flusher, Universal Jewel, 1923; Dawn Patrol, First National and Vitaphone, 1930; Sweethearts on Parade 1930; and two unidentified productions. Alos includes publicity photo of John Mack Brown. Rights advisory: Rights status of individual images not evaluated. I think the image does help the reader to better grasp the subject so relicensing as non-free seems fair to me if there's no policy that explicitly forbids that. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a policy that explicitly forbids that. Someone just needs to write up the rationale. Wikiacc (¶) 01:46, 13 December 2020 (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:Roshan Lal Anand receiving the Padma Shri Award.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 ⚡ 02:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scan of a newspaper or magazine photo. Claim of being the copyright holder is not credible. Whpq (talk) 11:13, 11 December 2020 (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:Plutodog.gif[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: Fair use status is fine, but the concerns raised about the accuracy of the file (possible original research) were not adequately addressed. No prejudice to restoration if someone can provide a citation proving that the file is the official version -FASTILY 06:56, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC: Previous publication. Non-free content must be a work which has been published or publicly displayed outside Wikipedia by (or with permission from) the copyright holder

No proof this was published by Disney or with their permission. No proof it's official either. Or what year it's from. According to User:Tbhotch, Wikipedia:Verifiability goes right out of the window when it comes to fair use media and they suggested I take this to FFD. I'm disappointed.

Another image is available for the article, but I don't oppose someone uploading a prettier image if it's properly sourced. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with anything but this. The design is outdated (it's from the Mickey Mouse Works-era), and it was published by Disney most likely as a promotional picture (even if this was a fan-made version of Pluto, there is nothing significantly different from the Disney's official design of Pluto for the series Mickey Mouse Works to consider it a derivative work). (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The design is outdated

Big deal. The article is about Pluto and the image should be representative. You shouldn't use screenshots from, for example, Mickey Mouse Clubhouse as those wouldn't be representative. For Donald Duck, his depiction in DuckTales (2017 TV series) is very much not outdated, but it isn't representative for his look throughout most of his career. I can barely believe you are actually claiming it wouldn't matter if Plutodog.gif would turn out to be fan art. Let's allow forgeries of classic paintings if they look nicer: who could tell the difference anyway? If you want a nicer picture, find one with a proper source. Your sharetv.com link may well be an example of WP:REFLOOP, at any rate, sharetv.com is a wiki. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 21:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please, go and tell that to anyone who cares. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 02:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fix citation and keep- This seems to be the original publication, and Mickey Mouse Works seems to be the origin of the image. The image captures the character's modern image well enough, as Pluto has not changed drastically since the 90s, unlike someone like Daisy Duck. It is also likely that this is Disney clip-art that they use for multiple forms of media for around a decade at a time. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@(Oinkers42): Sharetv.com is a wiki. I see no indication that Disney would have an account there or uploaded that image. Most of the text on that sharetv.com link has been borrowed from Wikipedia (without attribution as far as I can tell) so that should tell you what their standards are. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 22:45, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tbhotch's suggestion to "take it to WP:FFD" combined with Twinkle's interface confused me, but this file was very much eligible for WP:CSD#F4 {{Di-no source}}. I'm asking the closing admin to take that into account. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 11:25, 13 December 2020 (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:Gibson statue.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 ⚡ 02:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image is merely used to support the honor Bob Gibson received, rather than to illustrate the work of art itself or to discuss the artistic genre or technique, as claimed using {{Non-free 3D art}}. Failing WP:NFCC#8. Wcam (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2020 (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.