Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 July 9



File:KathyGreenlee (c 2009).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 F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * File:KathyGreenlee (c 2009).jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Ilamb94 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

unused, low-res, source link is dead, no foreseeable use  F ASTILY   00:43, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:NLE-Uniform-PHI.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. As fair use images instead of free images. The image pages will need to be changed and their use will need to be reviewed accordingly. If this is not done, the images may be deleted as copyright violations.  Sandstein  07:16, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * File:NLE-Uniform-PHI.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLC-Uniform-MIL.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLC-Uniform-PIT.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLC-Uniform-STL.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLW-Uniform-COL.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:AFCW-Uniform-DEN.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:LSUFootballUni.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by CH52584 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:MissStFootballUni.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by CH52584 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLE-Uniform-MIA.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Kyojikasshu ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:KBO-Uniform-Hanwha.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Nudimmud ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:KBO-Uniform-Doosan.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Nudimmud ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:KHL-Uniform-VIT.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by MadeinLatvia ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:ALE-Uniform-TB.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:Sports uniform of the Cleveland Indians.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:ALC-Uniform-KC.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:ALW-Uniform-LAA.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:ALW-Uniform-TEX.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLE-Uniform-ATL.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:NLW-Uniform-ARI.PNG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Silent Wind of Doom ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * File:KBO-Uniform-KT.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Nudimmud ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Per recent Supreme Court ruling in Star Athletica v Varsity Brands, if the design elements of a useful article would be copyrightable if reproduced in a 2D or 3D work of art separate from the useful article itself, then they constitute a copyrightable design. As such, this uniform is protected by copyright. Non-free use may be possible; I am not evaluating that myself. See SCOTUSblog summary. ~ Rob 13 Talk 16:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Leading note, this applies to all of these all the way down. I'm just not going to copy/paste myself. Anyways, these probably fall under fair use. We already have a licensing tag specific to this. See non-free sports uniform. The problem is that there are 688 listings in Category:Sports uniforms. Some of them are already properly tagged, some were just added to the category, some need reduction, others need a fuller rationale. I think, as long as all the versions are included in one image, the image is reduced in size, and there is a proper rationale these should be fine under fair use. The issue right now is working through the newly created backlog. --Majora (talk) 04:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Most are properly tagged with the exception of some misleading wording implying that they are only restricted by trademark. I have a pending bot task to deal with that wording issue. See Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 35. For fair use, things get tricky. Showing one uniform is undoubtedly fair use. I'm personally hesitant to show every variation. Even if we combine them into one file, that doesn't mean we're using the minimal amount necessary to convey crucial information. WP:NFCC is not straight-forward on this. I'd say we can probably include home/away, but any "special" versions of the uniform are likely pushing it. ~ Rob 13 Talk 04:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As the creator of the template/images in question, let me give a little bit of background on this. When licensing originally became an important matter some years ago, they all contained a template for sports uniform image licensing, a template for trademark/copyright image, and a template that included attribution to myself and rational for use in every article it was featured in.  A few years ago, the first image was tagged and suggested for movement to Commons.  I questioned this, given that they'd all been tagged as non-free fair use, but numerous people claimed that the images were free because "they featured letters or simple images that could not be considered copyrightable."  This still seemed sketchy, and I actually fought against this until it was finally explained to me as that the images themselves were what was being considered under copyright, not the uniforms they depicted.  Therefore, licensing was my decision, and I released my work as fair use.  Since then, things have become a bit of a mess.  Half of the images have been moved to Commons.  A quarter have had small changes made or have been reuploaded with other people claiming full attribution to themselves.  Some have had their names changed.  It's a bit of a mess, but as long as I could update them and they were featured in the articles, I paid little mind.
 * If a change needs to be made, and we must return to their original documentation and attribution, that's perfectly fine. There's already precedent for it, and if I looked back I'm sure all the information is still somewhere in the archives of this site (although the site has taken to purging the histories of images, making this a bit harder to do.)  It's a simple fix.
 * As for the matter of what is depicted in the images, each image is an accurate representation of the uniforms worn by a team. "Variations" on each uniform are not included.  Each uniform is depicted only once.  But each uniform is depicted.  Doing any less would be inaccurate, and inaccuracy holds no place in an encyclopedia.  This discussion came up when it was suggested that baseball uniforms be depicted similar to how basketball and soccer uniforms are depicted.  I've had little time to continue my work on hockey and football, instead focusing on baseball, but if I had the time, I'd prefer an accurate version of those sports be created in line with baseball.  Those depictions are incorrect and inaccurate.  Licensing woes are no excuse for misinformation. - The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 15:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It would depend on the type of "special" uniform and if it is critically discussed somewhere in the article. If it is, then grouping them all together in one image would be the way to go. As for the standard home/away uniforms, I agree. Those are probably all fine under our fair use policy. --Majora (talk) 04:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we should get to the heart of the terms "variation" and "special". In this day, the MLB is making millions off of putting as many different uniforms as they can on the field.  If they show it, people will buy it.  There's a home, a road, regular alternates, and special uniforms.  Special uniforms are one-off, things that are done for a special event or worn only once.  Regular alternates ar put on the schedule and worn on a regular basis.  Some teams wear a third uniform every Sunday.  Some wear them on the road for every night game.  The Marlins and White Sox have, at times, completely ditched the home white or away gray for a colored alternate.  The Indians wore their navy alternate every game of the 2017 post season.  Special uniforms are not included.  These images are the home white, the away gray, and any alternate that is regularly scheduled.  Of course, if there's a section on uniforms, variations on images can be used in said section, but I would suggest making that a different image so that the infobox images (which are the ones in quesiton) remain uniform across every team's page and don't become to unwieldy. --The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's been nearly a month since this issue was raised and this discussion started. I've held back from making any changes to the images in question, or any other baseball uniform images until this matter was closed, but I cannot wait any longer.  If any consensus is found or decision made, let me know and I will make whatever changes are necessary.  In the meantime, I'll go back to work. The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  08:01, 31 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   09:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as fair use. -DJSasso (talk) 10:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep all as a valid fair use (minimal use, used in articles, low-res, key to understanding topic, illustrating article text, etc.) though any improper tagging and other technical issues should be cleaned up, as a whole, I don't see the use as invalid. -- Jayron 32 02:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * As a side note, many of these were, at some point, moved to commons (see File:ALE-Uniform-BOS.PNG for one example). If, indeed, they are not copyright-free, but we do content that fair-use is valid, they should be all moved back and properly tagged.  -- Jayron 32 02:44, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:User Account Control.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: Restore to higher resolution version.  Sandstein  07:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * File:User Account Control.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by WikIan ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

File needs to be restored to the readable version. Currently it's just boxes with colors even User:FleetCommand agreed that DatBot reduced the image size beyond recognition. The image relies on the readability to discern what each UAC prompt is all about. The file has actually already been downsized in resolution in accordance with WP:IMAGERES from the original resolution.  WikIan - ( talk )  18:12, 1 July 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: ? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Restore. A useless image in no better than its absence. Both WP:NFC and WP:NFCC have drawn a line in the sand. To quote: "There is no firm guideline on allowable resolutions for non-free content; images should be rescaled as small as possible to still be useful as identified by their rationale, and no larger."And yet, we have bot enforcing a strict allowable resolution? That's unacceptable. It borderlines on editor abuse. Aside from the systematic bias, this has been my top grievance in Wikipedia. Also,, you should have at least pinged . —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Restore. You know, resizing every software screenshot to a 10×10 resolution is still obeying the word of WP:NFCC but is betraying its spirit and act of vandalism too. The rule that precedes NFCC is: The uploaded image must be usable.  Fleet  Command ( Speak your mind! ) 03:48, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Bendsura Project Beed.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  07:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Bendsura Project Beed.gif ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Atozxyz ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Low-quality animated gif image. Also has a small watermark. Is unusable and therefore out of project scope. XXN, 10:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Amanda Black new pic with blue hair.jpg
<div class="boilerplate ffd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color:#f3f9ff; margin:1em 0 0 0; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #aaa;">
 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  07:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Amanda Black new pic with blue hair.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Noblek1 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Previously published on official Facebook page, need permission. – Train2104 (t • c) 14:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Sheikh Shamsaldin Qais Sulayman Al-Said, Sheikh of Oman, 2016 Oman.jpg
<div class="boilerplate ffd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color:#f3f9ff; margin:1em 0 0 0; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #aaa;">
 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  07:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * <span class="plainlinks nourlexpansion lx" id="File:Sheikh Shamsaldin Qais Sulayman Al-Said, Sheikh of Oman, 2016 Oman.jpg">File:Sheikh Shamsaldin Qais Sulayman Al-Said, Sheikh of Oman, 2016 Oman.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Jonathan Matheson 73 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

The author claims "Enterprise and Business Act" as a PD reason but this is not a valid reason since it's not an orphan work. – Train2104 (t • c) 22:55, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 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.