Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 September 14

September 14

File:Hasan B. Alam MD, Chief of Surgery, Northwestern.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image uploader is stating they are the copyright holder. EXIF indicates this is Michael Parra Photography. WP:OTRS confirmation would be required. Whpq (talk) 00:44, 14 September 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:LHP High School play ground 1.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 ⚡ 10:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @Buiquangtu with the reason "source unclear. A file uploaded to viwiki before the date contains info suggesting that the file is not uploader's own work" FASTILY 04:23, 14 September 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:Alexpink.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo of an unnamed guitarist in a pink fuzzy suit with no description. fuzzy510 (talk) 08:01, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:45, 15 September 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:AmberBrovelli.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, watermarked image with no evidence of permission to release into the public domain. fuzzy510 (talk) 08:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - claimofbeing the copyright holder is not credible. -- Whpq (talk) 13:28, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:45, 15 September 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:QANTAS PLANE ON APPROACH TO CANBERRA.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Low-quality, unused image which doesn't depict anything well enough to be useful. fuzzy510 (talk) 08:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially orphaned (not used in the main space) with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:46, 15 September 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:Quod-1.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image with no description to ever help it to be used fuzzy510 (talk) 08:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:46, 15 September 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:File-Richard poon.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyrighted file. Found the same photo at http://pinoytrendingnews.net/richard-poon-i-will-go-for-a-foul-mouth-duterte-over-an-excellent-statesman-mar-stateswoman-poe/. Although the website is dated 2016, the photo was credited to the actor/singer himself (Richard Poon), so most likely this 2009 photo came from one of personal social media platforms/accounts of the artist. Possible copyvio on the uploader's part and not OK at Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:21, 14 September 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:Office of Rail and Road.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This same file is held at Commons under a free licence. It sounds like the licence might apply to this logo but I am not 100% certain. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Commons file is latest and new revision of the logo, and we could publish under ({{OGL3}}) a free licence. Warm Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:09, 15 September 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:Badminton World Federation (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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image was deleted at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 August 14, then restored (by me) in a mass nomination at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 September 5 where it did not receive individual attention.

While the overall rationale for restoration was sound for most of the images discussed, this particular one falls short of even my lax standards for WP:NFCC#8 by a wide margin: it's used solely in a gallery, has no non-free use rationale besides the boilerplate autoinserted by {{logo fur|Use=Org}}, has not been used to identify its organization for approximately eight years despite that being the image's stated purpose in the FUR, and has - generously - only two sentences of sourced commentary, stating merely the year when it replaced the next-older logo and the year when it was replaced by the current one. —Cryptic 23:39, 14 September 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:Crisis in Six Scenes.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is this non-free media adding to this article? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:51, 14 September 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 Football League.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image was deleted at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 August 14, then restored (by me) in a mass nomination at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 September 5 where it did not receive individual attention.

While the overall rationale for restoration was sound for most of the images discussed, this particular one falls short of even my lax standards for WP:NFCC#8 by a wide margin: its fair-use rationale claims it's the primary means of identifying the subject of the article, despite being a third of the way down the page and not being used by the organization since the 2015-2016 season; and it has no sourced commentary about the logo other than the mere fact and time of its replacement (and that, not even in the same section of the article). —Cryptic 00:01, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:14, 15 September 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.