Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 June 13

< June 12	June 14 >

June 13

File:National Bowl Playing 2013.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has not given convincing proof that the image is his own, and it is impossible that a member of the general public could have taken a shot at this distance. Moreover, the image is not being used in any article. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2018 (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:Clóvis de Barros Filho November 25, 2015.jpeg

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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has not given convincing proof that the image is his own. The uploader's name on the original source is different from that here, and the source reads "Some rights reserved". There is no proof that the image owner gave this uploader permission to use his image. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2018 (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:Hyundai Motor Company logo.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned en.wp-local image; have commons:File:Hyundai Motor Company logo.svg that is at least as good, and also has more appropriate license tagging. DMacks (talk) 04:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 14:04, 14 June 2018 (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 reconstruction of the Chigi Vase.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This says that it is the uploader's own work, but it appears to be a scan from a book. If it is a scan, then it is a copyvio and should be taken down. If the uploader is the author of the book, then I would have thought that it would be better to have the original image, rather than a scan with a visible fold mark down the middle? Furius (talk) 07:59, 13 June 2018 (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:Levi De Castro-2.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not being used on any article constructively. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:05, 14 June 2018 (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:Love Now filming studio.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not being used on any article in any constructive way, and the uploader hasn't been active since last October. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:05, 14 June 2018 (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:Ocean Bank 2017 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. Under current licensing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Querying ineligibility given symbol left. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Design isn't overly complex, would seem to be under the threshold of originality in the United States. I'm having trouble finding evidence this was previously published, though. ℯxplicit 01:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Explicit: Looks essentially the same as what's shown here with only a slight difference in color. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:53, 21 June 2018 (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:Fox Newsroom January 2018.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 as there is no significant sourced commentary about the newsroom. It's use is decorative. Whpq (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's a nice photo but its use doesn't conform to policy. Also, no reason was given by the uploader to support WP:NFCC#1. - Mr X 🖋 16:14, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it needs to stay to show the new improvement of Fox Newsroom, Mr. X is just against the descision because he is against the orginzations - user:nathanl01444 —Preceding undated comment added 16:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MrX made a policy-based argument. It doesn't matter what he personally thinks, and it doesn't matter what you think he thinks (WP:PERSONAL policy states "Comment on content, not on the contributor."). You'll need to use content and policy to counteract his position. DMacks (talk) 18:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nonfree images for that purpose are only allowed in conjunction with article content, and I don't see anything in Fox News about their studio design or improvements. But more importantly, given that this is the current newsroom where many people work, I think it would be trivial for someone there to take a picture and make a free release even if the company does not provide public access. DMacks (talk) 18:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the 2018 photo and delete the 2007 photo: there is already a newsroom photo in the article. Copy the FUR from File:Fox_News_Channel_newsroom.jpg then delete it. – Lionel^(talk) 09:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Fox News Channel newsroom.jpg is a freely licensed file, so its use is not restricted by WP:NFCC. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that may be the case, but the two pics are from different time periods. The 2007 is a historical pic.– Lionel^(talk) 05:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. There's no reasonable reason to expect that a free equivalent cannot be created or found to serve the same encyclopedic purpose of this non-free. It doesn't have to be a free version of this same image; it only has to be sufficient enough to serve the same purpose. The 2007 image may be old and maybe it needs to be removed from the article (not sure it needs to be deleted though), but it is freely licensed; this seems to indicate that someone could just as easily do the same for the latest version of the studio. The only way I could see this particular file being kept would be if there was something specific about the image itself which was the subject of sourced critical commentary in reliable sources and article content related to that commentary was added to the article to provide the contet required by WP:NFCC#8; otherwise, there's no reason why this particular non-free image needs to be seen by the reader. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:24, 15 June 2018 (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:Sean-cody-logo.gif

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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Low-quality GIF replaced by SVG: File:Sean-cody-logo.svg. Stefan2 (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 14:06, 14 June 2018 (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:Bret baier2-350x102.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC#8 - this is a previous logo for the show which is not the subject of significant sourced commentary. It no longer serves as the primary means of identification. Whpq (talk) 19:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Decorative use of former logos in image galleries is pretty much never considered policy-compliant unless there is some sourced critical commentary about the logo itself somewhere in the article. This probably could've just been removed by being WP:BOLD or even WP:PROD instead of bring to FFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:30, 15 June 2018 (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:YourWorldLogo07.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Former logo for a show with no significant sourced commentary and is just being used in an image gallery. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 19:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Decorative use of former logos in image galleries is pretty much never considered policy-compliant unless there is some sourced critical commentary about the logo itself somewhere in the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:31, 15 June 2018 (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:YW-Graphic2.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 ⚡ 03:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Former logo for a show with no significant sourced commentary and is just being used in an image gallery. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 19:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Decorative use of former logos in image galleries is pretty much never considered policy-compliant unless there is some sourced critical commentary about the logo itself somewhere in the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:31, 15 June 2018 (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.