Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 October 3

October 3

File:My Immortal 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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:My immortal logo.png Magog the Ogre (t • c) 04:24, 3 October 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:Aaron Resnick.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 first image only. — ξ ^xplicit 04:26, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Resnick and wright.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

File:Resnick wright and henken.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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

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

The claims of "own work" on this file (and four others by the same uploader which I will add presently to this nomination) are not credible. The uploader claims to have created them within the last six months, but one of the subjects on three of the photos died in 1986. Another file shows a floor plan that the article credits to another person. Apparently the uploader mistakenly thinks scanning images gives them a copyright on the images. —teb728 t c 06:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And Frank Lloyd Wright, who appears in two of the photos, died in 1959. This uploader has repeatedly attempted to upload these and similar images. I quickly found some of these images online. See Building a Community with Frank Lloyd Wright at https://issuu.com/papress/docs/9781568982458 for File:Resnick and wright.jpg (pg 8) and File:Floor_plan.jpg(pg 11), for example. Meters (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The uploader does seem to be misunderstanding how image licensing works. From the edit history of Aaron Resnick, it seems as if the uploader also tried to add these Wikimedia Commons. FWIW, it might be possible to convert "File:Aaron Resnick.jpg" to non-free per No. 10 of WP:NFCI for use in the main infobox of the "Aaron Resnick", but more information about the image would need to be provided per WP:NFCC#10a and WP:NFCC#1 would need to be satisfied. If not, then the file should be deleted. As for the other files, I don't see how the way they are currently being used in the article can be justified per WP:NFCCP, so unless by chance they qualify as public domain they should probably be deleted as well. Regardless of the above, anything converted to non-free or PD (if possible) will need to be properly licensed and sourced for copyright verification purposes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:16, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all except Aaron Resnick.jpg. I have uploaded a reduced size version of File:Aaron Resnick.jpg and switched its documentation to fair use and have placed a FUR and a license tag. (The prior version should be deleted using {{Orphaned non-free revisions}}).
It would be greatly appreciated, Michaelphmccarty, if you would go to the image, click edit, and, next to |source=, replace what is currently written there: "Uploaded by [[User:Michaelphmccarty]], without detail on source", with the source – where you got this image. Without that, my fair use rationale is wanting. You should do this if you want this article to retain that image. It might still need to be deleted otherwise.
@Marchjuly: Having come upon this discussion after answering the uploader's question at the Teahouse, and having seen this same misunderstanding so many times before, I have created Wikipedia:Scanning an image does not make it your "own work".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks for checking these. As I posted above, the infobox photo seemed like the most likely candidate for conversion to non-free, but it will probably need better source information to survive. I also see you're trying to explain this to the uploader, so perhaps they will be able to provide that information. Also, thank you taking the time to create that essay; I think it will be a big help to new uploaders. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The aforementioned files (except the one converted to non-free) have been reuploaded as File:Resnick, Wright and Henken.jpg, File:Calabi-Picker House.jpg, File:Resnick Floor Plan.jpg and File:A Resnick and Wright.jpg, and tagged them with {{OTRS pending}}. Assuming that OTRS is OK with the licensing, the question is then how to deal with the multiple verrsions of three of the files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:23, 8 October 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:Sokun Nisa.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith, but referral as this looks like a studio image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:58, 3 October 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:KAT’s seizure banner.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: Relisted on Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 October 11#File:KAT’s_seizure_banner.jpg}}

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:Eubearth back in high school, grade 12.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unusued, Personal image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:34, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No longer used. Reh man 14:05, 4 October 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:Sri Lakshmi Consh.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: Withdrawn Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Previously published. No obvious link with uploader. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:35, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is owner, creator and copyright holder of said imade, and this can be proved. It is genuine image of subject. It should be moved to commons IMHO.Rickbrown9 (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image owner and copyright holder is Richard Shaw Brown (2007). Ancient Astrological Gemstones & Talismans - 2nd Edition. Hrisikesh LTD.ISBN 978-974-8102-29-0 Rickbrown9 (talk) 18:37, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the confirmation, OTRS isn't normally needed to confirm when it's your image, but if it's an image that was published, you might want to add a note on the file description page anyway. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:44, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn as uploader has confirmed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:44, 4 October 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:Certificate3.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: Keep withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) Varun FEB2003 14:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Background image is uncredited. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's s fruity border created by my friend for a wedding invitation which I have copied. Completely free to use. I don't know how to add that line saying my friend created it can you do it? Varun FEB2003 09:23, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn. Thanks for the confirmation, Do you have the original border/image as it might be useful clipart?Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ya sure I have it should I upload it? Its just the border. @Sfan00 IMG: and you are most welcome! Varun FEB2003 12:04, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you have the full background upload that to Commons as well :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no I don't have the full background! Varun FEB2003 14:01, 5 October 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:Manuel Quezon voice recorded speech.ogg

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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid PD claim, or insufficent information to confirm status. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:10, 3 October 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:Disney Junior 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: keep in Disney Junior, remove all other instances. — ξ ^xplicit 04:26, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFC#UUI§17 in all articles except Disney Junior. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:16, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from all articles except Disney Junior, per nom. clpo13_(talk) 18:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
'Convert to PD'; the entire image is made up of PD text and non-copyrightable shapes. Nate • (chatter) 20:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not only copyrightable, it's been formally registered (#VAu001043271) and is specifically listed at c:COM:TOO as an exemplar of an image above the threshold of originality. —Cryptic 20:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well then, it's different (and finally a registered logo! Let's do this more, other networks so we here know how to use your images correctly)...Remove all but the namesake use per nom. Nate • (chatter) 02:51, 11 October 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:Bobby Williams dressed as a Firefighter.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal file. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused. Reh man 14:04, 4 October 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:William Edmond Armitage.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but clearly an old photo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

William Edmond Armitage died in 1878, so this image is likely in the public domain. Without a source for it being published in the United States before 1923, however, I can't be sure. The image can be found here and here online. clpo13_(talk) 18:32, 3 October 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:Rev. Nazzareno Formosa.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work but obviously from another source given the halftoning. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This returned nothing!? Varun FEB2003 12:09, 4 October 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:Edward R. Welles.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 ⚡ 02:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but obviously from another source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edward R. Welles died in 1888, so this is likely in the public domain. Unfortunately, I can't find a source for it being published in the United States before 1923, so I can't be sure. On the Web, however, the image can be found here. clpo13_(talk) 18:30, 3 October 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:Giovanni M Camilleri.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 ⚡ 02:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but photo quality suggests another source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it is a photograph of a photograph. {{PD-old-70}} as subject died in 1924. Deryck C. 13:38, 4 November 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:Archbishop Mauro Caruana.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 ⚡ 02:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but photo quality suggests another source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a photograph of a photograph. {{PD-old-70}} as subject died in 1943. Deryck C. 13:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- We know when the subject died, not when the author did. It's the latter that matters. —Cryptic 14:04, 4 November 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:Mgr Guzeppi Portelli.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 ⚡ 06:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but photo quality suggests another source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change to fair use? Deryck C. 13:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We can't change to fair use unless we know the source; it would fail WP:NFCC#10a. There'd be no reason to change to fair use if we accepted the claimed source, which would be absurd - it's a photo dated 2016 of a person who died in 1949. The only thing plausibly "own work" about this is the act of digitization. Delete. —Cryptic 14:02, 4 November 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:Bishop David Johnson.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 ⚡ 06:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as own work, but photo quality suggests a different source. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change to fair use? Deryck C. 13:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As above, that isn't an option unless we know the real source. This image was created in 2016 of a person who died in 1995, so the sourcing claim is just as absurd. Delete. —Cryptic 14:02, 4 November 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:Bartolomé Rull.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: File is PD -FASTILY 04:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like an older portrait, Date of portrait? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archive of the source. I think, but am not certain, that the image is the same as the portrait discussed in the text, which was painted in 1757 by Antoine de Favray. —Cryptic 18:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So could be PD ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, but I'd really prefer confirmation from someone who speaks at least a little Spanish. I've been burned badly by google translate before. —Cryptic 14:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Native Spanish speaker here. The passage is, indeed, talking about said portrait. — ξ ^xplicit 04:26, 6 January 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:Bishop Joaquín Canaves.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: Procedural close as stale (3 months, no comments). You'll probably get an answer if you ask at WP:MCQ -FASTILY 08:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like an older potrait, Date of portrait? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:30, 3 October 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:Giovanni Carmine Pellerano.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: PD-old -FASTILY 04:50, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Older portrait. Date of Portrait? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This looks like it's been restored, which might create a new copyright in the source country, though not in the US (see Sweat of the brow and threshold of originality#United States). The original dates from sometime before 1773, when the creator died, which would make it public domain per {{PD-old-100}}. It needs to be relicensed to reflect this, and I would avoid copying it to Commons until its copyright status in other countries (such as Malta, where the restoration was done) is made clear. clpo13_(talk) 18:41, 3 October 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:CameronDawson.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 Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 07:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Poor quality. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until we can do better. @Sfan00 IMG: Poor quality is only a valid reason for deletion if we have a superior alternative. Until we can find a higher-quality free-copyright photograph of him, this can stay. Deryck C. 13:45, 4 November 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:The Fly Jamaica Boeing 757-200 Aircraft In Toronto.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 Deryck Chan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo was stolen from here. Not eligible for fair use as free images of this airline's aircraft can be easily taken and uploaded. — Sunnya343✈ (háblame • my work) 22:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless uploader provides evidence of permission for free use. clpo13_(talk) 23:17, 3 October 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:Gillespie County Airport as Seen from Above.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 Deryck Chan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adapted from the photo here. — Sunnya343✈ (háblame • my work) 23:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless uploader provides evidence of permission for free use. clpo13_(talk) 23:18, 3 October 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.