Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 March 12

< March 11	March 13 >

March 12

File:Del-bank.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: Textbook WP:NFCC#8 violation. No prejudice to restoration if the article is significantly expanded with sourced critical commentary explicitly discussing this image in-depth -FASTILY 03:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is an image of a 1933 newspaper article. The original publication included a copyright notice [1] and I'm not aware of any information indicating that the NYT failed to file for a copyright extension. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 01:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fair use of tiny fraction (far less than 1%) of the copyright newspaper issue. Rjensen (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is also 100% of the article. See [2]. Regardless, we can't keep it without a fair use rationale. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 01:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NY TIMES did NOT copyright each article separately--(at great expense for hundreds of articles on 145 pages in this issue) instead they cpd the single issue--it's comparable to using 1/100 of one page from a book--ie minimal. Rjensen (talk) 02:17, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the cost of registering a copyright in 1933 was $1.00 for a literary, musical or artistic work, (eg an entire book or newspaper) as specified by the Copyright Act of 1909. However, if the work was a motion picture, the cost would have been $10.00, and if it was a group of photographs or prints, the cost would have been $2.00. The NYTimes issue had 145 pages--and maybe thousands of separate articles. Likewise a movie cost $10 (for the whole film) and frame by frame it would cost $$$$$$. Rjensen (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence has bene provided that this is public domain. Wikipedia has stricter use of copyrighted content than fair use in in that use of such content must meet all of the non-free content criteria. I do not see how this image as used would qualify for use as non-free content. -- Whpq (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it meets all the criteria at WP:NFCCP -- which criteria does it fail?? Rjensen (talk) 21:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It fails WP:NFCC#8. The removal of the image does not detract from a reader's understanding of Emergency Banking Act. -- Whpq (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

well no, in my opinion it "significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic" --revealing how the major news media let people know that drastic changes to their finances were underway. -- that's what "big" news is like. Rjensen (talk) 00:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That purpose you propose here is not supported by any sourced verbiage in the article. And even if such commentary were in the article, it wouldn't need a nonfree image of a nespaper article forva reader to understand it. -- Whpq (talk) 05:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the important text it illustrates at Emergency Banking Act: "Fears of other bank closures spread from state to state as people rushed to withdraw their deposits while they still could do so. Within weeks, all other states held their own bank holidays in an attempt to stem the bank runs, with Delaware becoming the 48th and last state to close its banks on March 4." Standard history textbooks to this day feature this event: with Delaware acting every bank in the US was closed and no state found a solution to the crisis. Indeed no one knew when they would see their $$$ again--all bank deposits were frozen. That is what powerful news looks like (compare this week in 2023 with Silicon Valley Bank closing and Washington acting immediately to rescue depositors. Rjensen (talk) 07:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That passage does not support "revealing how the major news media let people know that drastic changes to their finances were underway" (emphasis added). I would also suggest that if such text were in the article, it would be sufficient to use text alone to convey the concept and would not meet WP:NFCC#1. -- Whpq (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2023 (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:AFPAC III 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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A transparent version of the logo is now available at Commons. Once someone alters the color of the white text to black, the non-free version on Enwiki loses its purpose and becomes inferior quality. I also question if even with the background that this image even misses the threshold of originality. Crusader1096 (message) 04:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and relicense to PD. The logo is text and simple shapes and is not eligible for copyright. The logo is in use. If it is replaced by a different file, then this logo can simply be proposed for deletion without need for an FFD. -- Whpq (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's sort of what I did, but @Magog the Ogre reverted that and said I should take it here. Crusader1096 (message) 04:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sort of? No, you tagged it for F8 as the same file being on Commons but the images are different due to the transparency. The F8 was correctly declined. Whpq (talk) 05:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well I was still directed towards here, so. Crusader1096 (message) 07:38, 13 March 2023 (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:Silent Spring Book-of-the-Month-Club edition.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. Whpq (talk) 01:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The file is the book cover of Silent Spring enclosed with an endorsement by William O. Douglas. However, the fact that Douglas has written an endorsement can be adequately described with text plus proper citation. In fact, a short quote from the endorsement would be more effective than a blurry fair use image. The file's omission would not be detrimental to readers' understanding. Apart from Douglas' endorsement, the file's existence duplicates File:SilentSpring.jpg. The file therefore violates WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#3a, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 05:01, 12 March 2023 (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:Onisiforosroushias.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. Whpq (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2 uploads, both of different sizes, low-res, no metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 07:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 13:30, 13 March 2023 (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:ORoushias.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. Whpq (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2 uploads, both of different sizes, low-res, no metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 07:51, 12 March 2023 (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:RanjanaD.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. Whpq (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a screencap of a film. Same as File:Ranjana deshmukh.jpg. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:00, 12 March 2023 (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:RIVERSIDE AS YOU LIKE IT final flat.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. Whpq (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM US, this file is possibly copyrighted. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious use in the article Riverside Shakespeare Company. Salavat (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2023 (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:RIVERSIDE LOVES LABORS LOST poster SMALL.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. Whpq (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM US, this file is possibly copyrighted. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious use in the article Riverside Shakespeare Company. Salavat (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2023 (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:RIVERSIDE THE MANDRAKE 6 SMALL with TITLE.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM US, this file is possibly copyrighted. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2023 (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:RIVERSIDE THE MANDRAKE 6 SMALL.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM US, this file is possibly copyrighted. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2023 (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:RIVERSIDE THE MANDRAKE1 SMALL.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM US, this file is possibly copyrighted. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2023 (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:Ricci-crisostomo.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small, low-res, no metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:14, 12 March 2023 (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:RR2005.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small, low-res, thumbnail-size, no metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:19, 12 March 2023 (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:Samuel Hazard Gillespie Jr 1970s.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. Whpq (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of photo. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:22, 12 March 2023 (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:Alon Bar Moshe Ivgy.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. Whpq (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small, low-res, thumbnail-size, no metadata. All uploads (including ones on commons) are of varying sizes and only 1 of has full metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:30, 12 March 2023 (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:Moshe Ivgi as Aaron Cohen.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. Whpq (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small, low-res, thumbnail-size, no metadata. All uploads (including ones on commons) are of varying sizes and only 1 of has full metadata. Doubtful own work. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:31, 12 March 2023 (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:5 AUD Front Queen.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. Whpq (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted per c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Australia#Currency. Should be converted to fair use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (all four nominated). Fair use versions of these already exist, and I have replaced these with them on Banknotes of the Australian dollar. Reywas92^Talk 13:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Redundant to File:2016 Australian five dollar note obverse.jpg. Salavat (talk) 13:44, 13 March 2023 (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:5 AUD Back.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. Whpq (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted per c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Australia#Currency. Should be converted to fair use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Redundant to File:2016 Australian five dollar note reverse.jpg. Salavat (talk) 13:44, 13 March 2023 (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:100 AUD Front.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. Whpq (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted per c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Australia#Currency. Should be converted to fair use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Redundant to File:Australian 100 dollar note Obverse Fourth Series.jpeg. Salavat (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2023 (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:100 AUD Back.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. Whpq (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted per c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Australia#Currency. Should be converted to fair use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mislabelled non-free file with no obvious value. Redundant to File:Australian 100 dollar note Reverse Fourth Series.jpg. Salavat (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2023 (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:Dodgers60logo.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. Whpq (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work of complex logo. No FOP in the US for this. Should be converted to SVG and fair use if needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:22, 12 March 2023 (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:FLBB 2017.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. Whpq (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook metadata in EXIF. Permission needed. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:41, 12 March 2023 (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:Frankie Cutlass Platinum Plaque.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The poster Cutlass is holding probably pushes this over copyright threshold and should be considered to be a fair use file. However, Cutlass is living and File:Frankie_Cutlass_NY_State_Of_Mind.jpg, as such this should be delted. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the copyrighted poster forms a large portion of the image and is a significant element of the photo so de minimis does not apply. -- Whpq (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2023 (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:Aixam logo.svg

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: No consensus. Worth noting that even if the file was converted to non-free, its use would be compliant with WP:NFCC. It may be worthwhile to ask for opinions at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, which generally receives more traffic than FfD -FASTILY 00:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Minorax: says this file is above c:COM:TOO US and should be licensed as non-free on Wikipedia. I'd say it's not and hence can be freely licensed under {{PD-ineligible-USonly|France}} on Wikipedia. Jonteemil (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep current licensing as PD for US only. I concur with Jonteemil. See for example this denied appeal to the US Copyright office for a bolt logo with 3D effects, but this is likely copyrighted in France with their doctrine of artistic intent. -- Whpq (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any comment from @Minorax:?Jonteemil (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I still think that this is above TOO in the US. The file quoted by Whpq is simple as it does not have any 3D effects on it, whereas for the Aixam logo, the 3D lighting effect of it pushes this above the threshold. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:26, 15 March 2023 (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:2020 Portland Place brandishing incident.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. Whpq (talk) 01:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A single (recent) incident in Portland and Westmoreland Places is already given undue prominence with the amount of text, as if it's the most important incident in the history of the location. Since the incident has its own article, free-use doesn't apply to Portland and Westmoreland Places: the image is superfluous, arbitrary, and replaceable with text alone. This image is also largely redundant to File:Mark and Patricia McCloskey.jpg, another non-free image that is used appropriately. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:06, 12 March 2023 (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.