Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 December 31

< December 30	January 1 >

December 31

File:NashvilleSoundsCapLogo.png

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both logos are non-free and being used in the infobox of Nashville Sounds. They seem to be the same logo (the only real difference being the background coloring and the "TM" mark), so only one is really needed per WP:NFCC#3a, unless the design is considered to be too simple to be copyrighted and the licensing can be changed to {{PD-text}} or some other free license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to agree with the reasoning here. The "cap" version is at best a minor variation of the original or the *same* logo with the border obscured by the background. Ubcule (talk) 21:48, 19 January 2016 (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:KingNeptuneNesCart.jpg

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 ⚡ 04:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC #3a - minimal number of items - there is already a cover art that conveys equivalent significant information.

The minimal use rationale provided is not satisfactory, cartridge colour does not need to be conveyed with an image.

Fails WP:NFCC #8 - image is not being used as primary means of visual identification at the top of article as a cover art is already present. The1337gamer (talk) 11:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the picture does act as a means of visual identification, however if you feel that it is redundant then I can remove it. Thank you for informing me on the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Owen1962 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 31 December 2015 (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:A scene from Phijigee Mani, Manipuri film.jpg

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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 since it does not add any context to help the reader understand the subject of the article. Steel1943 (talk) 15:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the claim for fair use is invalid: the image is not discussed nor will it provide any significant understanding of the subject. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:41, 1 January 2016 (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:A scene from Yenning Amadi Likla.png

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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 as it does not provide any assistance with illustrating the subject of the article. The image illustrates two children, and that is not what the article is about. Steel1943 (talk) 15:05, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the claim for fair use is invalid: the image is not discussed nor will it provide any significant understanding of the subject. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:42, 1 January 2016 (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:Agbani Darego, judge at the 2014 Miss World finale in London.jpg

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 F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFG. January (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2015 (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:GAnderson signature.png

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 ⚡ 04:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is claiming as own work but has uploaded many images which are clear copyright violations (watermarked with web site addresses, or found on web with credits to press and photo agencies, etc). There is no reason to believe that this image is actually the uploader's own work as he seems to have simply copied a bunch of Gerald Anderson photos from the web and uploaded them to Wikipedia. Whpq (talk) 19:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if such a signature would be eligible for copyright protection; commons:Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag suggests that most of them would not meet TOO. If this one doesn't then it probably can be kept.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:56, 6 January 2016 (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:Andy Brassell.jpg

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 ⚡ 04:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be out of scope. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Brassell. Stefan2 (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2015 (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:Northern Colorado Bears Script Logo.jpg

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 ⚡ 04:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Northern Colorado Athletics old wordmark.png has replaced this file in all articles. ❄ Corkythehornetfan ❄ 23:03, 31 December 2015 (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:ARNO logo.jpg

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. File:ARNO logo.jpg matches the one used on the website, while File:Rohingya Solidarity Organization (emblem).jpg can be found in the 'Profile Pictures' photo album on the organization's Facebook page. — ξ ^xplicit 01:09, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both non-free logos were being used in the infobox of Rohingya insurgency in Western Myanmar. A non-free use rationale for each usage is provided, but this kind of decorative use in an infobox (they were being used in a manner similar to a flag icon) almost certainly fails to comply with WP:NFCC#8 so I removed the images accordingly. Each image, however, is also being used in the infoboxes of the stand-alone articles about their respective organizations: Arakan Rohingya National Organization and Rohingya Solidarity Organisation. I was going tweak the non-free use rationales to reflect these usages, but none of the source links are active and I cannot verify if these are logos actually used by these organziations. The "ARNO" logo looks like the one being used on the group's official website and the "RSO" logo looks like the one being used on the group's official Facebook account, though its coloring is different. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my intention was to use that logos only to identify the organizations, something permitted by WP rules, so I dont understand the nomination. Removing them would made the articles poorer & less comprehensive. --HC PUNXKID 11:44, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They are being used to identify the organizations in the respective stand-alone articles about the organziations. Non-free images need to satisfy all 10 of the criterion listed in WP:NFCCP: WP:NFCC#8 states that " Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Using the non-free logo of an organization in the infobox of a stand-alone article about the organization is generally considered to satisfy WP:NFCC#8 because the entire article is about the organization itself. Using it in a infobox of an article like "Rohingya insurgency in Western Myanmar" as if it were a flag icon is considered to be mainly decorative and not something allowed by WP:NFCC. The reader's understanding of the Rohingya insurgency does not suffer in any way if the image is removed and the reader can see what the logo looks like by clicking on the wikilink to the organization's stand-alone article in the infobox. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:14, 4 January 2016 (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.