Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 November 14



File:John Taylor &

 * 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 ⚡  03:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:John Taylor & ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Tayl2104 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Low quality, unused image only (talk) 03:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:45, 15 November 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:The Brazen Head (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. Nthep (talk) 21:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * File:The Brazen Head (logo).png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Nikthestunned ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).


 * Fails WP:NFCC: Article about an historic building (The Brazen Head) is illustrated by a CC licensed image of building. Business logo (which does not appear on building anyway) does not significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission is not detrimental to that understanding.
 * Fails WP:NFCC: A CC licensed image of building is available and is already used.
 * Fails WP:NFCC: In the context of an article about a historic building, the logo used by the present owners only in their website is not encyclopedic.
 * Should fail WP:NFCC: The non-free image is only being used in the article because an editor has ignored NFCC#8 and repeatedly reverted to include the image. Neil S. Walker (talk) 10:15, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The article is about both the business and the building. A business's logo is an acceptable fair use of an image in the infobox for identification of the business. It passes WP:NFCC because there is no free equivalent for the logo. A free image of the building cannot replace a logo and for that reason there are two separate infobox fields for Template:Infobox building. It passes WP:NFCC because the article is also about the business, thus the logo being encyclopedic.  It passes WP:NFCC because it is currently in use in the article.  It passes WP:NFCC because it is being used for identification purposes of the business, it increases the readers' understanding of the business and its omission is detrimental to the understanding of the business. Overall, the businesses's logo is being used in the infobox for identification purposes of the business and is an acceptable fair use of the logo, just as it is for numerous other business articles across Wikipedia. Aspects (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * A misapplication of the fair use criteria; there is no automatic entitlement to use non-free content in any article, and there is already a freely licensed image which clearly identifies the building and its use as a pub. A design used by the building's current owners—Stepmark Inns—on its website does not meet NFCC#8: "Criterion 8, which every non-free file must satisfy, requires that the image not merely be educational, but "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic". This means, first, that the image must either address something that is discussed in the text of the page, or add in a meaningful and substantive way to the understanding of the overall topic of the page. It is not enough for the image to provide some additional information beyond what the text covers. Secondly, the image must make it significantly easier for the reader to understand what the page discusses, beyond what the text, alone, can convey." It is neither educational nor adds anything to a reader's understanding of the topic. Infobox fields—and infoboxes—are not mandatory; just because a parameter exists for a logo, it does not, and in many instances of historic buildings probably should not, mean it must be used. Also, the uploader was notified that there were issues with the use of the image on 3 November. Neil S. Walker (talk) 09:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note to closing editor: This discussion should be relisted since the nominator failed to notify the uploader, me (the person who reverted the deletion and recommended starting a discussion here) or tagged the image on the article about this discussion. I have notified the uploader and tagged the image in the article. The article is on my watchlist, but that was not enough to know about this discussion. Aspects (talk) 20:52, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  04:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The infobox image is meant to identify the subject. In this case, we have a free image that does so sufficiently. I don't see the contextual significance in the prose (i.e., discussion of the logo) to warrant an otherwise decorative fair use image (NFCC#8). czar  12:35, 15 November 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:All4one Twenty+.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 ⚡  03:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:All4one Twenty+.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Devonne88 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

non free image Sry85 (talk) 05:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagged as needing permission of copyright holder to use the stated license. (That would be the photographer, Delious Kennedy, unless the copyright was expressly transferred.) Please follow the directions from the tag and share the case number here. czar  12:32, 15 November 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.