Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 20



File:Big Brother 16 (U.S.) 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: relisted on. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:29, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * File:Big Brother 16 (U.S.) Logo.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * 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:Gharcd.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  21:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Gharcd.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Shshshsh ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fails MOS:FILM and WP:NFCC - Vivvt ( Talk ) 07:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The file adheres to WP:NFCC, I believe. A poster used to represent a film made almost 40 years ago. Section 8 is actually the one most well abided by as one can see in the rationale. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Contrary to the assertion above, this is not a poster being used to represent the film.   It is being used fir the soundtrack of the film which is not the main subject of the article.   Note that the faire use rationale on the image description page claims it is being used in the main infobox bit that is not the case.  -- --Whpq (talk) 18:49, 23 June 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:Silver Jubilee Park, NTPC Township.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 F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  03:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Silver Jubilee Park, NTPC Township.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Sumitsharaf ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Uploader claims to be copyright holder but this has been pub;ished on a blog back in 2014 so OTRS confirmation would be required.. See http://korbanews.blogspot.ca/2014/06/silver-jubilee-park-ntpc-korba_2.html Whpq (talk) 10:58, 20 June 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:RUeyegouge.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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:33, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * File:RUeyegouge.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * 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:RIT Hockey.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: Keep in team articles, no consensus on the other use. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * File:RIT Hockey.svg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Two Hearted River ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free logo being used in 2009–10 RIT Tigers men's ice hockey season, RIT Tigers men's ice hockey, RIT Tigers women's ice hockey. Generally, the non-free use of university mascot logos such as this is only allowed in a stand-alone article about the mascot itself or the univeristy's athletic department because this is where any sourced critcal commentary is likely to be found discussing the mascot. In individual teams articles, the consensus in other similar FFD has been to not allow non-free use becuase such usage tends to be more "decorative" that contextual and the individual teams are seen as "child entities" of the main athletic team article per item 17 of WP:NFC. In such cases, a non-free ogo specific to an individual team or a feely licensed/public domain wordmark is allowed (like seen here or here), which seems to be the case here. So, I suggest keep for individual team articles

In individual season articles, however, the use of sponsor/organizer/team logos is pretty much not allowed per item 14 of WP:NFC, unless it is a logo specific to that particular reoccuring season. Moreover, individual season articles are conisdered to be child entities of the main team article, so item 17 of WP:NFC#UUI is also an issues. Another problem with the season article is that the source provided for the image is to a program for the 2010-2011 season, whereas the logo is being used in an article about the 2009-2010 season. For these reasons, I suggest remove from the season article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:25, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep in the two team articles, remove from the season article. Salavat (talk) 01:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep all uses. NFC#UUI item 14 does not apply because the logo is not that of a "perennial event", nor is it that of a "sponsoring company". Powers T 19:52, 25 June 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:GPL front gate added by Saurabhsulabh Singh.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: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * File:GPL front gate added by Saurabhsulabh Singh.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Saurabhsulabh Singh ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image is watermarked with the uploader's name. Whpq (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Watermarks are not a valid reason for deletion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  00:31, 6 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:03, 20 June 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:Government Polytechnic Lucknow added by Saurabhsulabh Singh.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: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Government Polytechnic Lucknow added by Saurabhsulabh Singh.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Saurabhsulabh Singh ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image is watermarked with the uploader's name. Whpq (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Watermarks are not a valid reason for deletion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  00:31, 6 June 2017 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 19:03, 20 June 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.